1. Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs. endoscopic mucosal resection for early Barrett's neoplasia in the West: a retrospective study
- Author
-
Praneeth Kudaravalli, Sunguk Jang, Lady Katherine Mejia Perez, Neal Mehta, Milad Pourmousavi Khoshknab, Moamen Gabr, Peter V. Draganov, Salmaan Jawaid, John A. Dumot, Fauze Maluf-Filho, Saowanee Ngamruengphong, Norio Fukami, Dennis Yang, Hiroyuki Aihara, Omar A. Alaber, Amitabh Chak, Tiffany Chua, John J. Vargo, and Amit Bhatt
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Neoplasm, Residual ,Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ,Esophageal Neoplasms ,business.industry ,Gastroenterology ,Esophageal adenocarcinoma ,Endoscopic mucosal resection ,Retrospective cohort study ,Endoscopic submucosal dissection ,Adenocarcinoma ,Surgery ,Disease rates ,Barrett Esophagus ,Treatment Outcome ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Interquartile range ,medicine ,Humans ,Neoplasm Recurrence, Local ,Esophagus ,Adverse effect ,business ,Retrospective Studies - Abstract
Background The difference in clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early Barrett's esophagus (BE) neoplasia remains unclear. We compared the recurrence/residual tissue rates, resection outcomes, and adverse events after ESD and EMR for early BE neoplasia. Methods We included patients who underwent EMR or ESD for BE-associated high grade dysplasia (HGD) or T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) at eight academic hospitals. We compared demographic, procedural, and histologic characteristics, and follow-up data. A time-to-event analysis was performed to evaluate recurrence/residual disease and a Kaplan–Meier curve was used to compare the groups. Results 243 patients (150 EMR; 93 ESD) were included. EMR had lower en bloc (43 % vs. 89 %; P 0.99), early bleeding (0.7 % vs. 1 %; P > 0.99), delayed bleeding (3.3 % vs. 2.1 %; P = 0.71), and stricture (10 % vs. 16 %; P = 0.16) between EMR and ESD. Patients with non-curative resections who underwent further therapy were excluded from the recurrence analysis. Recurrent/residual disease was 31.4 % [44/140] for EMR and 3.5 % [3/85] for ESD during a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 15.5 (6.75–30) and 8 (2–18) months, respectively. Recurrence-/residual disease-free survival was significantly higher in the ESD group. More patients required additional endoscopic resection procedures to treat recurrent/residual disease after EMR (EMR 24.2 % vs. ESD 3.5 %; P Conclusions ESD is safe and results in more definitive treatment of early BE neoplasia, with significantly lower recurrence/residual disease rates and less need for repeat endoscopic treatments than with EMR.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF