Safety and efficacy of surgical and endoscopic resection in the treatment of duodenal subepithelial lesions.
Duodenum
Endoscopic resection
Subepithelial tumors
Surgery
Treatment
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2022
06 2022
Historique:
received:
06
02
2021
accepted:
08
09
2021
pubmed:
23
9
2021
medline:
14
5
2022
entrez:
22
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Duodenal subepithelial lesions (D-SELs) are rare and their resection is challenging. Unfortunately, data on surgical and endoscopic resection of D-SELs are scarce. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of surgical resection and endoscopic resection (ER) for D-SELs. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of patients with non-ampullary D-SELs who underwent ER or surgery and compared the outcomes between ER and surgery with no/low-risk SELs over 15 mm from March 2010 to August 2020. Clinicopathologic findings, procedure-related parameters, and follow-up data were analyzed. A total of 107 patients (108 lesions) were enrolled; 52 patients (53 lesions) received ER and 55 patients (55 lesions) received surgery. In ER group, en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate were 94 and 89%, respectively. Major adverse events rate was 6%. One (2%) patient experienced local recurrence. In surgery group, R0 resection was achieved in all cases. Major adverse events rate was 20%. Recurrence rate and distant metastases rate were 4 and 8%, respectively. One (2%) patient died from septicemia during follow-up. Thirty-three patients in each group were enrolled in the comparison. There were no significant differences in age, sex, lesion size and location (P > 0.05). More histologically GISTs and muscularis propria-originated lesions were treated by surgery (P < 0.05). ER was significantly associated with a shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, lower cost, less estimated blood loss, and lower major adverse events rate compared to the surgery group (P < 0.05). However, R0 resection rate, mortality, recurrence rate, and metastases rate were not significant different (P > 0.05). ER is an effective and safe treatment modality for selected patients with non-ampullary D-SELs by expert endoscopists. Surgery is a radical method for D-SELs that should be reserved for D-SELs not amenable to ER.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Duodenal subepithelial lesions (D-SELs) are rare and their resection is challenging. Unfortunately, data on surgical and endoscopic resection of D-SELs are scarce. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of surgical resection and endoscopic resection (ER) for D-SELs.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of patients with non-ampullary D-SELs who underwent ER or surgery and compared the outcomes between ER and surgery with no/low-risk SELs over 15 mm from March 2010 to August 2020. Clinicopathologic findings, procedure-related parameters, and follow-up data were analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 107 patients (108 lesions) were enrolled; 52 patients (53 lesions) received ER and 55 patients (55 lesions) received surgery. In ER group, en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate were 94 and 89%, respectively. Major adverse events rate was 6%. One (2%) patient experienced local recurrence. In surgery group, R0 resection was achieved in all cases. Major adverse events rate was 20%. Recurrence rate and distant metastases rate were 4 and 8%, respectively. One (2%) patient died from septicemia during follow-up. Thirty-three patients in each group were enrolled in the comparison. There were no significant differences in age, sex, lesion size and location (P > 0.05). More histologically GISTs and muscularis propria-originated lesions were treated by surgery (P < 0.05). ER was significantly associated with a shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, lower cost, less estimated blood loss, and lower major adverse events rate compared to the surgery group (P < 0.05). However, R0 resection rate, mortality, recurrence rate, and metastases rate were not significant different (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
ER is an effective and safe treatment modality for selected patients with non-ampullary D-SELs by expert endoscopists. Surgery is a radical method for D-SELs that should be reserved for D-SELs not amenable to ER.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34550437
doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08740-3
pii: 10.1007/s00464-021-08740-3
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4145-4153Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Cho JW, Korean ESD Study Group (2016) Current guidelines in the management of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors. Clinical endoscopy 49:235–240
doi: 10.5946/ce.2015.096
Reddymasu SC, Oropeza-Vail M, Pakseresht K et al (2012) Are endoscopic ultrasonography imaging characteristics reliable for the diagnosis of small upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions? J Clin Gastroenterol 46:42–45
doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e318226af8e
Gaspar JP, Stelow EB, Wang AY (2016) Approach to the endoscopic resection of duodenal lesions. World J Gastroenterol 22:600–617
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i2.600
Delle Fave G, O’Toole D, Sundin A et al (2016) ENETS consensus guidelines update for gastroduodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms. Neuroendocrinology 103:119–124
doi: 10.1159/000443168
Shamali A, McCrudden R, Bhandari P et al (2016) Pancreaticoduodenectomy for nonampullary duodenal lesions: indications and results. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28:1388–1393
doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000738
Lu C, Jin W, Mou Y et al (2020) Optimal laparoscopic management and oncological outcomes of gastrointestinal stromal tumors in duodenum: pancreaticoduodenectomy or pancreas-sparing duodenectomy? Cancer Manag Res 12:4725–4734
doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S254972
Dasari BVM, Al-Shakhshir S, Pawlik TM et al (2018) Outcomes of surgical and endoscopic resection of duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (NETs): a systematic review of the literature. J Gastrointest Surg 22:1652–1658
doi: 10.1007/s11605-018-3825-7
Zhou Y, Wang X, Si X et al (2020) Surgery for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of pancreaticoduodenectomy versus local resection. Asian J Surg 43:1–8
doi: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2019.02.006
Du H, Ning L, Li S et al (2020) Diagnosis and treatment of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 11:e00156
doi: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000156
Cameron JL, Riall TS, Coleman J et al (2006) One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. Ann Surg 244:10–15
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000217673.04165.ea
Shen Z, Chen P, Du N et al (2019) Pancreaticoduodenectomy versus limited resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surg 19:121
doi: 10.1186/s12893-019-0587-4
Bartel MJ, Puri R, Brahmbhatt B et al (2018) Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms. Surg Endosc 32:2859–2869
doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5994-y
Kim TW, Kim GH, Park DY et al (2017) Endoscopic resection for duodenal subepithelial tumors: a single-center experience. Surg Endosc 31:1936–1946
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5200-7
Ye LP, Mao XL, Zheng HH et al (2017) Safety of endoscopic resection for duodenal subepithelial lesions with wound closure using clips and an endoloop: an analysis of 68 cases. Surg Endosc 31:1070–1077
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5065-9
Lee SW, Sung JK, Cho YS et al (2019) Comparisons of therapeutic outcomes in patients with nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NADNETs): a multicenter retrospective study. Medicine 98:e16154–e16154
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016154
Ren Z, Lin S-L, Zhou P-H et al (2019) Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) without laparoscopic assistance for nonampullary duodenal subepithelial lesions: our clinical experience of 32 cases. Surg Endosc 33:3605–3611
doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-06644-3
Gincul R, Ponchon T, Napoleon B et al (2016) Endoscopic treatment of sporadic small duodenal and ampullary neuroendocrine tumors. Endoscopy 48:979–986
doi: 10.1055/s-0042-112570
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
Tan Y, Tang X, Guo T et al (2017) Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric stromal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer. Surg Endosc 31:3376–3382
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5350-7
Chok A-Y, Koh Y-X, Ow MYL et al (2014) A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing pancreaticoduodenectomy versus limited resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 21:3429–3438
doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3788-1
Joensuu H (2008) Risk stratification of patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Hum Pathol 39:1411–1419
doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2008.06.025
Li C, Chu Y, Lv L et al (2021) Safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection for the treatment of duodenal subepithelial lesions. J Gastrointest Oncol 12:856–863
doi: 10.21037/jgo-20-301
Zhang H, Liu Q (2020) Prognostic indicators for gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a review. Trans Oncol 13:100812
doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2020.100812
Zhong Y, Deng M, Liu B et al (2013) Primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors: current advances in diagnostic biomarkers, prognostic factors and management of its duodenal location. Intractable Rare Dis Res 2:11–17
pubmed: 25343095
pmcid: 4204577
Liu Z, Zheng G, Liu J et al (2018) Clinicopathological features, surgical strategy and prognosis of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a series of 300 patients. BMC Cancer 18:563
doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4485-4