Long-term outcomes after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer according to hospital volumes in Japan: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis.
Early gastric cancer
Endoscopic submucosal dissection
Hospital volume
Long-term outcome
Propensity score matching
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2019
12 2019
Historique:
received:
21
08
2018
accepted:
19
02
2019
pubmed:
26
2
2019
medline:
18
7
2020
entrez:
27
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There is a lack of data regarding the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) without curative resection, and the relationship of these outcomes with hospital volumes remains unclear. This study evaluated long-term outcomes of patients who underwent ESD for EGC without curative resection according to hospital volumes in Japan. This multicenter retrospective study evaluated 1,969 patients who did not meet the criteria of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association for curative resection between January 2000 and August 2011. Hospitals were classified according to the annual number of ESD procedures: low- and medium-volume group (LMVG), high-volume group (HVG), and very high-volume group (VHVG). Clinicopathological features, overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared across groups after a generalized propensity score matching analysis. In 495 pairs of generalized propensity score-matched patients, the 5-year OS, DSS, and RFS rates were 81.5%, 97.9%, and 97.6% for LMVG; 86.9%, 98.2%, and 97.0% for HVG; and 85.4%, 98.5%, and 97.6% for VHVG, respectively. The 5-year DSS and RFS rates did not significantly differ among the three groups. However, 5-year OS was significantly worse in the LMVG than in the HVG and VHVG (P < 0.001 and P = 0.008, respectively). DSS and RFS in patients with EGC who did not meet the criteria for curative resection did not differ across hospital volumes in Japan. Even in cases in which ESD for EGC involved non-curative resection, the procedure is feasible across Japanese hospitals with different volumes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
There is a lack of data regarding the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) without curative resection, and the relationship of these outcomes with hospital volumes remains unclear. This study evaluated long-term outcomes of patients who underwent ESD for EGC without curative resection according to hospital volumes in Japan.
METHODS
This multicenter retrospective study evaluated 1,969 patients who did not meet the criteria of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association for curative resection between January 2000 and August 2011. Hospitals were classified according to the annual number of ESD procedures: low- and medium-volume group (LMVG), high-volume group (HVG), and very high-volume group (VHVG). Clinicopathological features, overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared across groups after a generalized propensity score matching analysis.
RESULTS
In 495 pairs of generalized propensity score-matched patients, the 5-year OS, DSS, and RFS rates were 81.5%, 97.9%, and 97.6% for LMVG; 86.9%, 98.2%, and 97.0% for HVG; and 85.4%, 98.5%, and 97.6% for VHVG, respectively. The 5-year DSS and RFS rates did not significantly differ among the three groups. However, 5-year OS was significantly worse in the LMVG than in the HVG and VHVG (P < 0.001 and P = 0.008, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
DSS and RFS in patients with EGC who did not meet the criteria for curative resection did not differ across hospital volumes in Japan. Even in cases in which ESD for EGC involved non-curative resection, the procedure is feasible across Japanese hospitals with different volumes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30805782
doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06710-4
pii: 10.1007/s00464-019-06710-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4078-4088Références
Surg Endosc. 2014 Apr;28(4):1298-306
pubmed: 24337914
Ann Intern Med. 1997 Oct 15;127(8 Pt 2):757-63
pubmed: 9382394
Gastric Cancer. 2017 Jan;20(1):1-19
pubmed: 27342689
Dig Liver Dis. 2013 Aug;45(8):651-6
pubmed: 23422031
Gastric Cancer. 2011 Jun;14(2):101-12
pubmed: 21573743
Gastric Cancer. 2009;12(3):148-52
pubmed: 19890694
Endoscopy. 2014 Nov;46(11):933-40
pubmed: 25019970
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Feb;17(2):448-54
pubmed: 19904573
Gut. 2009 Mar;58(3):331-6
pubmed: 19001058
Intern Med. 2010;49(4):253-9
pubmed: 20154428
Dig Endosc. 2016 Jan;28(1):3-15
pubmed: 26234303
Endoscopy. 2009 Feb;41(2):118-22
pubmed: 19214889
Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 May;63(6):776-82
pubmed: 16650537
Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Dec;64(6):877-83
pubmed: 17140890
Gastric Cancer. 2008;11(4):214-8
pubmed: 19132483
J Gastroenterol. 2017 Feb;52(2):175-184
pubmed: 27098174
Int J Cancer. 2010 Dec 15;127(12):2893-917
pubmed: 21351269
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jun 28;19(24):3761-9
pubmed: 23840114
Endoscopy. 2017 Sep;49(9):855-865
pubmed: 28564714
Endoscopy. 2006 Oct;38(10):987-90
pubmed: 17058162
Gastric Cancer. 2000 Dec;3(4):219-225
pubmed: 11984739
Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Oct;56(4):507-12
pubmed: 12297765
Surg Endosc. 2015 May;29(5):1145-55
pubmed: 25171882