食管切除术后胃管癌行胃切除术与内镜下粘膜切除或内镜下粘膜剥离治疗效果的比较分析。

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Yukinori Toyoshima, Kosuke Narumiya, Kenji Kudo, Hiroto Egawa, Kei Hosoda
{"title":"食管切除术后胃管癌行胃切除术与内镜下粘膜切除或内镜下粘膜剥离治疗效果的比较分析。","authors":"Yukinori Toyoshima,&nbsp;Kosuke Narumiya,&nbsp;Kenji Kudo,&nbsp;Hiroto Egawa,&nbsp;Kei Hosoda","doi":"10.35772/ghm.2022.01059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated the clinical characteristics of patients with gastric tube cancer following esophagectomy at our hospital, and to examine the outcomes of gastrectomy versus endoscopic submucosal dissection. Of 49 patients who underwent treatment for gastric tube cancer that developed 1 year or more after esophagectomy, 30 patients underwent subsequent gastrectomy (Group A), and 19 patients underwent endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) (Group B). The characteristics and outcomes of these two groups were compared. The interval between esophagectomy and diagnosis of gastric tube cancer ranged from 1 to 30 years. The most common location was the lesser curvature of the lower gastric tube. When the cancer was detected early, EMR or ESD was performed, and the cancer did not recur. In advanced tumors, gastrectomy was performed but the gastric tube was difficult to approach and lymph node dissection was difficult; two patients died as a result of the gastrectomy. In Group A, recurrence occurred most often as axillary lymph node, bone, or liver metastases; in Group B, no recurrence or metastases were observed. In addition to recurrence and metastasis, gastric tube cancer is often observed after esophagectomy. The present findings highlight the importance of early detection of gastric tube cancer after esophagectomy and that the EMR and ESD procedures are safe and have significantly fewer complications compared with gastrectomy. Follow-up examinations should be scheduled with consideration given to the most frequent sites of gastric tube cancer occurrence and the time elapsed since esophagectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":12556,"journal":{"name":"Global health & medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"40-46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9974229/pdf/ghm-5-1-40.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of the outcomes of gastrectomy <i>vs.</i> endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of gastric tube cancer after esophagectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Yukinori Toyoshima,&nbsp;Kosuke Narumiya,&nbsp;Kenji Kudo,&nbsp;Hiroto Egawa,&nbsp;Kei Hosoda\",\"doi\":\"10.35772/ghm.2022.01059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study investigated the clinical characteristics of patients with gastric tube cancer following esophagectomy at our hospital, and to examine the outcomes of gastrectomy versus endoscopic submucosal dissection. Of 49 patients who underwent treatment for gastric tube cancer that developed 1 year or more after esophagectomy, 30 patients underwent subsequent gastrectomy (Group A), and 19 patients underwent endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) (Group B). The characteristics and outcomes of these two groups were compared. The interval between esophagectomy and diagnosis of gastric tube cancer ranged from 1 to 30 years. The most common location was the lesser curvature of the lower gastric tube. When the cancer was detected early, EMR or ESD was performed, and the cancer did not recur. In advanced tumors, gastrectomy was performed but the gastric tube was difficult to approach and lymph node dissection was difficult; two patients died as a result of the gastrectomy. In Group A, recurrence occurred most often as axillary lymph node, bone, or liver metastases; in Group B, no recurrence or metastases were observed. In addition to recurrence and metastasis, gastric tube cancer is often observed after esophagectomy. The present findings highlight the importance of early detection of gastric tube cancer after esophagectomy and that the EMR and ESD procedures are safe and have significantly fewer complications compared with gastrectomy. Follow-up examinations should be scheduled with consideration given to the most frequent sites of gastric tube cancer occurrence and the time elapsed since esophagectomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global health & medicine\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"40-46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9974229/pdf/ghm-5-1-40.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global health & medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35772/ghm.2022.01059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global health & medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35772/ghm.2022.01059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨我院食管切除术后胃管癌患者的临床特点,并探讨胃切除术与内镜下粘膜下剥离术的疗效。49例食管切除术后发生1年及以上的胃管癌患者接受治疗,其中30例患者行胃切除术(A组),19例患者行内镜下粘膜切除术(EMR)或内镜下粘膜剥离(ESD) (B组)。比较两组患者的特点和结局。从食管切除术到诊断为胃管癌的时间间隔为1至30年。最常见的位置是胃下管的小弯。早期发现肿瘤时,行EMR或ESD,肿瘤未复发。晚期肿瘤行胃切除术,但胃管难以进路,淋巴结清扫困难;两名患者死于胃切除术。A组复发多为腋窝淋巴结、骨或肝转移;B组无复发、转移。除了复发和转移外,食管切除术后还经常观察到胃管癌。本研究结果强调了食管切除术后早期发现胃管癌的重要性,并且与胃切除术相比,EMR和ESD手术是安全的,并发症明显减少。随访检查的安排应考虑到胃管癌最常发生的部位和食管切除术后的时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of the outcomes of gastrectomy vs. endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of gastric tube cancer after esophagectomy.

This study investigated the clinical characteristics of patients with gastric tube cancer following esophagectomy at our hospital, and to examine the outcomes of gastrectomy versus endoscopic submucosal dissection. Of 49 patients who underwent treatment for gastric tube cancer that developed 1 year or more after esophagectomy, 30 patients underwent subsequent gastrectomy (Group A), and 19 patients underwent endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) (Group B). The characteristics and outcomes of these two groups were compared. The interval between esophagectomy and diagnosis of gastric tube cancer ranged from 1 to 30 years. The most common location was the lesser curvature of the lower gastric tube. When the cancer was detected early, EMR or ESD was performed, and the cancer did not recur. In advanced tumors, gastrectomy was performed but the gastric tube was difficult to approach and lymph node dissection was difficult; two patients died as a result of the gastrectomy. In Group A, recurrence occurred most often as axillary lymph node, bone, or liver metastases; in Group B, no recurrence or metastases were observed. In addition to recurrence and metastasis, gastric tube cancer is often observed after esophagectomy. The present findings highlight the importance of early detection of gastric tube cancer after esophagectomy and that the EMR and ESD procedures are safe and have significantly fewer complications compared with gastrectomy. Follow-up examinations should be scheduled with consideration given to the most frequent sites of gastric tube cancer occurrence and the time elapsed since esophagectomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
×
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