Comparison of endoscopic resection, laparoscopic resection, and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery in esophageal or gastric subepithelial lesions in a Thai medical school.
{"title":"Comparison of endoscopic resection, laparoscopic resection, and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery in esophageal or gastric subepithelial lesions in a Thai medical school.","authors":"Phuphat Vongwattanakit, Voranaddha Vacharathit, Kasaya Tantiphlachiva, Mawin Vongsaisuwon, Chadin Tharavej, Sopark Manasnayakorn, Pornpol Palanusorn","doi":"10.2478/abm-2025-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Esophageal and gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) are increasingly identified in routine endoscopic evaluations, necessitating optimal resection strategies. Minimally invasive techniques, including endoscopic resection (ER), laparoscopic resection (LR), and laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS), have distinct advantages. The present study compares the outcomes of these techniques.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the clinical outcomes of ER, LR, and LECS in the management of esophageal or gastric SELs at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was conducted on patients undergoing ER, LR, or LECS for esophageal and gastric SELs from January 2012 to August 2022. The primary outcome was the complete resection rate. Secondary outcomes included success rates, complications, and length of hospital stay. Statistical significance was set at <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 42 patients, 11 (26.2%) underwent ER, 12 (28.6%) underwent LR, and 19 (45.2%) underwent LECS. Complete resection was significantly higher in LR (100%) and LECS (84.2%) than ER (45.5%) (<i>P</i> = 0.033). Delayed bleeding occurred in 18.2% of ER cases (<i>P</i> = 0.052). Hospital stay was shortest in ER (3.9 d) and longest in LR (9.3 d) (<i>P</i> = 0.877).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While all techniques had high success rates, ER had the lowest complete resection rate and the highest bleeding risk. LR ensured complete resection but required longer hospitalization. LECS provided a balance between oncologic efficacy and safety. Surgical planning should be tailored based on tumor characteristics and surgical expertise.</p>","PeriodicalId":8501,"journal":{"name":"Asian Biomedicine","volume":"19 4","pages":"209-217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12442231/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Biomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/abm-2025-0026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Esophageal and gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) are increasingly identified in routine endoscopic evaluations, necessitating optimal resection strategies. Minimally invasive techniques, including endoscopic resection (ER), laparoscopic resection (LR), and laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS), have distinct advantages. The present study compares the outcomes of these techniques.
Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of ER, LR, and LECS in the management of esophageal or gastric SELs at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital.
Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on patients undergoing ER, LR, or LECS for esophageal and gastric SELs from January 2012 to August 2022. The primary outcome was the complete resection rate. Secondary outcomes included success rates, complications, and length of hospital stay. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
Results: Among 42 patients, 11 (26.2%) underwent ER, 12 (28.6%) underwent LR, and 19 (45.2%) underwent LECS. Complete resection was significantly higher in LR (100%) and LECS (84.2%) than ER (45.5%) (P = 0.033). Delayed bleeding occurred in 18.2% of ER cases (P = 0.052). Hospital stay was shortest in ER (3.9 d) and longest in LR (9.3 d) (P = 0.877).
Conclusion: While all techniques had high success rates, ER had the lowest complete resection rate and the highest bleeding risk. LR ensured complete resection but required longer hospitalization. LECS provided a balance between oncologic efficacy and safety. Surgical planning should be tailored based on tumor characteristics and surgical expertise.
期刊介绍：
Asian Biomedicine: Research, Reviews and News (ISSN 1905-7415 print; 1875-855X online) is published in one volume (of 6 bimonthly issues) a year since 2007. [...]Asian Biomedicine is an international, general medical and biomedical journal that aims to publish original peer-reviewed contributions dealing with various topics in the biomedical and health sciences from basic experimental to clinical aspects. The work and authorship must be strongly affiliated with a country in Asia, or with specific importance and relevance to the Asian region. The Journal will publish reviews, original experimental studies, observational studies, technical and clinical (case) reports, practice guidelines, historical perspectives of Asian biomedicine, clinicopathological conferences, and commentaries
Asian biomedicine is intended for a broad and international audience, primarily those in the health professions including researchers, physician practitioners, basic medical scientists, dentists, educators, administrators, those in the assistive professions, such as nurses, and the many types of allied health professionals in research and health care delivery systems including those in training.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
