Search

Background/aims: To overcome the technical limitations of classic endoscopic resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), various methods have been developed. In this study, we examined the role and feasibility of clip-and-cut procedures (clip-and-cut endoscopic full-thickness resection [cc-EFTR]) for gastric GISTs., Methods: Medical records of 83 patients diagnosed with GISTs after endoscopic resection between 2005 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Moreover, clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed., Results: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and cc-EFTR were performed in 51 and 32 patients, respectively. The GISTs were detected in the upper third of the stomach for ESD (52.9%) and cc-EFTR (90.6%). Within the cc-EFTR group, a majority of GISTs were located in the deep muscularis propria or serosal layer, accounting for 96.9%, as opposed to those in the ESD group (45.1%). The R0 resection rates were 51.0% and 84.4% in the ESD and cc-EFTR groups, respectively. Seven (8.4%) patients required surgical treatment (six patients underwent ESD and one underwent cc-EFTR,) due to residual tumor (n=5) and post-procedure adverse events (n=2). Patients undergoing R0 or R1 resection did not experience recurrence during a median 14-month follow-up period, except for one patient in the ESD group., Conclusions: cc-EFTR displayed a high R0 resection rate; therefore, it is a safe and effective therapeutic option for small gastric GISTs.

Background/aims: The treatment of superficial esophageal neoplasms (SENs) in cirrhotic patients is challenging and rarely investigated. We evaluated the outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to determine the efficacy and safety of treating SENs in patients with liver cirrhosis., Methods: The baseline characteristics and treatment outcomes of patients who underwent ESD for SENs between November 2005 and December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed., Results: ESD was performed in 437 patients with 481 SENs, including 15 cirrhotic patients with 17 SENs. En bloc resection (88.2% vs. 97.0%) and curative resection (64.7% vs. 78.9%) rates were not different between the cirrhosis and non-cirrhosis groups (p=0.105 and p=0.224, respectively). Bleeding was more common in cirrhotic patients (p=0.054), and all cases were successfully controlled endoscopically. The median procedure and hospitalization duration did not differ between the groups. Overall survival was lower in cirrhotic patients (p=0.003), while disease-specific survival did not differ between the groups (p=0.85)., Conclusion: ESD could be a safe and effective treatment option for SENs in patients with cirrhosis. Detailed preprocedural assessments are needed, including determination of liver function, esophageal varix status, and remaining life expectancy, to identify patients who will obtain the greatest benefit.

Obesity, along with its comorbidities, has become a significant public health concern worldwide. Bariatric surgery is considered the most effective treatment modality; however, only 2% of patients with obesity undergo bariatric surgery. Endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) are emerging alternatives to traditional bariatric surgery for patients who are not eligible for or do not prefer surgical treatment. EBMTs are generally categorized as space-occupying, gastric restrictive, aspiration, and small bowel therapies. We aimed to review various non-balloon and non-gastroplasty devices with available clinical data and discuss the possible mechanisms of action, efficacy, and safety profile of these EMBTs.

Background/aims: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is usually performed on patients with chronic underlying diseases in the general ward (GW). This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of PEG performed on patients in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) compared with those of PEG performed in the GW., Methods: The medical records of 27 patients in the SICU and 263 in the GW, who underwent PEG between January 2013 and July 2017, were retrospectively reviewed., Results: The median age of the 27 SICU patients was 66 years, and their median body mass index was 21.1 kg/m2. In the SICU group, the median baseline Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 4, and the median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score was 16. The median interval between surgery and PEG in SICU patients was 30 days, with a PEG failure rate of 3.7%. Acute complications in SICU patients included bleeding (7.4%) and ileus (11.1%), while chronic complications included aspiration pneumonia (7.4%) and tube obstruction (3.7%). The rates of acute and chronic complications did not differ significantly between the SICU and GW groups. The 30-day mortality rate was 14.8% in SICU patients and 5.3% in GW patients (p=0.073)., Conclusion: PEG is a safe and feasible method of enteral feeding for critically ill patients who require ICU care after surgery.

A gastrocolocutaneous fistula is a rare complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). We report a case of a gastrocolocutaneous fistula presenting with intractable diarrhea and gastrostomy tube malfunction. A 62-year-old woman with a history of multiple system atrophy was referred to us because of PEG tube malfunction. Twenty days prior to presentation, the patient started developing sudden diarrhea within minutes after starting PEG feeding. Fluoroscopy revealed that the balloon of the PEG tube was located in the lumen of the transverse colon with the contrast material filling the colon. Subsequently, the PEG tube was removed and the opening of the gastric site was endoscopically closed using hemoclips. Clinicians should be aware of gastrocolocutaneous fistula as one of the complications of PEG insertion. Sudden onset of diarrhea, immediately after PEG feedings, might suggest this complication, which can be effectively treated with endoscopic closure.

Background/aims: The detection of multifocal lesions is important for the successful management of gastric neoplasms. We investigated the characteristics of missed simultaneous lesions and the reason for the missed diagnoses., Methods: A total of 140 patients who underwent repeat endoscopy before endoscopic resection between June 2013 and June 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. We classified simultaneous lesions into three groups based on a review of earlier images: group 1, no images of the location of simultaneous lesions were taken; group 2, no corresponding lesion was evident in the previous images; and group 3, simultaneous lesions were visible in the earlier images but a biopsy was not performed., Results: Simultaneous lesions were found in 12 patients (8.6%) with 13 lesions, comprising 10 dysplasia (76.9%) and three adenocarcinoma (23.1%). Regarding the reasons for missed diagnoses, seven lesions (53.8%) were classified as group 3, five (38.5%) as group 1, and the remaining lesion (7.7%) as group 2. There were no significant differences in the characteristics of the patients with and without simultaneous lesions., Conclusions: Lesions disregarded or unnoticed during endoscopic examination were the main reason for missed diagnosis of simultaneous lesions. Endoscopists should consider the possibility of simultaneous lesions and attempt to meticulously evaluate the entire gastric mucosa.

Background/aims: To evaluate the yields and utility of 19-gauge (G) Trucut biopsy (TCB) versus 22 G fine needle aspiration (FNA) for diagnosing gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs)., Methods: We retrieved data for 152 patients with a gastric SET larger than 2 cm who had undergone endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided 19 G TCB (n=90) or 22 G FNA (n=62). Relevant clinical, tumor-specific, and EUS procedural information was reviewed retrospectively., Results: A specific diagnosis was made for 76 gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) and 51 non-GIST SETs. The diagnostic yield of TCB was greater than that of FNA (77.8% vs. 38.7%, p<0.001). The percentage of non-diagnostic specimens (suspicious and insufficient) was significantly lower in the TCB group (6.7% and 15.5%, respectively) than in the FNA group (22.6% and 38.7%, respectively; both p<0.001). TCB accurately diagnosed 90.9% of GISTs and 81.1% of non-GIST SETs, whereas FNA accurately diagnosed 68.8% of GISTs and 14.3% of non-GIST SETs. There were nine technical failures with TCB, and the rate of adverse events did not differ between the groups (TCB vs. FNA, 3.3% vs. 8.1%; p=0.27)., Conclusions: Nineteen-gauge TCB is safe and highly valuable for diagnosing gastric SETs larger than 2 cm if technical failure can be avoided.