Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a therapy for early gastric cancer (EGC) that can be provided relatively easily and safely in any institution. Identification of the resection margin is a problem in EMR, especially in cases of piecemeal EMR. Despite the long-standing widespread use of piecemeal EMR for EGC, its limitation and long-term outcomes in clinical practice have not been fully evaluated. This study aimed to determine the risk factors of piecemeal EMR, the local recurrence rates, and the mortality rate.
Methods: A cross-sectional, retrospective cohort study was performed to investigate the risks of piecemeal EMR for patients with the diagnosis of differentiated adenocarcinoma localized to the mucosa. Local recurrence of EGC was investigated by annual follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for 10 years. EMR was performed with snare electrocautery using a two-channel scope. When a resection margin was clearly positive for cancer, additional surgery was performed soon after the initial EMR.
Results: For the 149 EGC patients (mean age, 68.8 ± 9.8; male, 77%) who underwent EMR between 1995 and 2001, EMR was performed en bloc in 66 cases and piecemeal in 83 cases. The comorbid conditions existing in 34 of the 149 patients included other malignancies (n = 12), heart failure (n = 5), pulmonary disease (n = 7), liver cirrhosis (n = 4), and other illness (n = 6). However, EMR was completed without complication. The mean area (length × width) of the lesions was 404 ± 289 mm(2) in the piecemeal group and 250 ± 138 mm(2) in the en bloc groups. The en bloc and piecemeal EMR groups differed significantly in terms of unclear horizontal margins but not in terms of unclear vertical margins. Multiple logistic regression suggested that the adjusted odds ratio for maximum diameters exceeding 20 mm for piecemeal EMR was 2.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-5.64). According to Kaplan-Meier estimates, the local recurrence rate was 30% (95% CI, 20-40%) at both 5 and 10 years. No recurrence was observed in the en bloc group. The adjusted hazard ratio of unclear horizontal margins for local recurrence was 1.63 (95% CI, 1.12-2.36). A total of 24 patients died after EMR because of comorbid conditions, including other malignancies (n = 11), cardiovascular disease (n = 6), pulmonary disease (n = 4), liver cirrhosis (n = 2), and traffic accident (n = 1). However, no patient died of gastric cancer during the 10-year follow-up period.
Conclusions: An evaluation of horizontal margins in terms of local recurrence after piecemeal EMR is important, and en bloc resection is recommended. Close follow-up assessment is warranted, especially within 5 years in cases of unclear margin resection after piecemeal EMR. The use of EMR is safe even for patients with severe comorbid conditions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1830-y | DOI Listing |
Surg Endosc
January 2025
Fundación Barceló, Instituto Universitario de Ciencias de la Salud, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Background And Aims: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colorectal lesions can be challenging, and residual lesions after EMR can progress to colorectal cancer. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding thermal ablation of margins [using argon plasma coagulation (APC) or snare tip soft coagulation (STSC)] in reducing recurrence rates after EMR.
Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase.
Endoscopy
January 2025
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Background: Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (≥ 20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is succeeded by a 6-month surveillance endoscopy to evaluate the post-EMR scar for recurrence. Data from expert centers suggest that routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies can be omitted, but data from community hospitals are lacking.
Methods: The agreement between optical assessment and histological confirmation by routine biopsies was evaluated in a post-hoc analysis of the STAR-LNPCP study (NTR7477), containing prospective data on 6-month post-EMR scar assessments in 30 Dutch community hospitals (October 2019 to May 2022).
Curr Gastroenterol Rep
December 2025
Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
J Gastrointest Surg
February 2025
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. Electronic address:
Background: Endoscopic resection of visible dysplastic lesions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an alternative to colectomy. The endoscopic techniques that can be used include endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and ESD combined with EMR. These endoscopic approaches may allow organ preservation in patients with IBD.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFGut Liver
January 2025
Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!