Search

Background and study aims Despite use of various endoscopic therapies in patients with tumor-related bleeding, various rates of successful immediate hemostasis and short-term rebleeding have been reported. We aimed to evaluate preliminary results of use of the EndoClot polysaccharide hemostatic system (PHS) in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) from a gastric malignancy. Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed data from a prospectively collected database of 12 patients with acute UGIB from a gastric malignancy who had been treated with EndoClot PHS. The EndoClot air compressor was used to propel 2 g of absorbable modified polymer particles onto the bleeding site. We checked successful immediate hemostasis, rebleeding events and mortality within 30 days. Results Twelve patients were enrolled in the study. The median patient age was 72.5 years (range, 57 – 89). The initial median hemoglobin level was 6.75 g/dL (range, 5.4 – 8.9). The median systolic blood pressure was 114 mmHg (range, 86 – 153). Eleven patients had advanced gastric cancer and one patient had a gastrointestinal stromal tumor. The lower body of the stomach was the most common tumor location (58.3 %), and the median tumor size was 40 mm (range, 15 – 100). Immediate hemostasis was achieved in all patients, and rebleeding developed in 2 of 12 patients (16 %), 3 and 5 days after treatment. There were no significant Endoclot PHS-related adverse events, and there was no all-cause mortality at 30 days after the intervention. Conclusions Endoclot PHS represents a new alternative, complementary, and promising therapy for patients with an acute UGIB from a gastric malignancy.

Background/Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a controlled release, once-daily formulation of mosapride (UI05MSP015CT) in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). Methods: Patients with FD were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either UI05MSP015CT (15 mg once a day, study group) or mosapride (5 mg three times a day, control group) and corresponding placebo for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in the gastrointestinal symptom score (GIS) evaluated at enrollment and after 4 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in the Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K), rate of satisfactory symptom relief, and rate of adverse events. Results: A total of 138 patients were enrolled (female, 73.9%; mean age, 44.0±15.4 years). After excluding patients who violated the study protocol, 59 and 58 patients from the study and control groups, respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. No difference was observed in drug compliance between the control and study groups (97.07%±4.52% vs 96.85%±6.05%, p=0.870). Changes in GIS scores were -9.69±6.44 and -10.01±5.92 in the study and control groups. The mean difference in GIS change between groups was 0.33 (95% confidence interval, -1.75 to 2.41), demonstrating non-inferiority of UI- 05MSP015CT (p=0.755). The rate of satisfactory symptom relief was not different between the study and control groups (39.0% vs 56.9%, p=0.053). No differences in change in NDI-K score (14.3 vs 16.9, p=0.263) or rates of adverse events (12.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.062) were observed between the study and control groups. Conclusions: Once-daily mosapride is not inferior to conventional mosapride in efficacy and is safe in patients with FD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Screening endoscopies in individuals 40 years or older in regions where gastric cancer is prevalent increase the diagnosis of gastric cancer at an early stage. However, the benefits of screening endoscopies in a young population (24 month group (23.8 mm [standard deviation, 22.2 mm] vs. 30.5 mm [standard deviation, 23.1 mm], P = 0.008). However, the proportion of patients with early gastric cancer did not differ between the two groups (≤24 months vs. >24 months group; 67.6% vs. 65.7%, P = 0.712). On multivariable analysis, periodic endoscopies did not influence the early diagnosis of gastric cancer (with >24 months as the reference group: ≤24 months, odds ratio = 0.939, 95% confidence interval = 0.583-1.513).Although periodic endoscopies aided in the detection of gastric cancer when lesions were smaller in size, they seemed not to increase the proportion of patients with early gastric cancer in young patients diagnosed with resectable gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND:Gastric cancer with undifferentiated histology has different clinicopathologic characteristics compared to differentiated type gastric cancer. We aimed to compare the risk of synchronous or metachronous tumors after curative resection of early gastric cancer (EGC) via endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), according to the histologic differentiation of the primary lesion. METHODS:Clinicopathological data of patients with initial-onset EGC curatively resected via ESD between January 2007 and November 2014 in a single institution were reviewed. We analyzed the incidence of synchronous or metachronous tumors after ESD with special reference to the differentiation status of the primary lesion. RESULTS:Of 1,560 patients with EGC who underwent curative resection via ESD, 1,447 had differentiated type cancers, and 113 had undifferentiated type cancers. The cumulative incidence of metachronous or synchronous tumor after ESD was higher in the differentiated cancer group than in the undifferentiated cancer group (P = 0.008). Incidence of metachronous or synchronous tumor was 4.8% and 1.2% per person-year in the differentiated and undifferentiated cancer groups, respectively. The Cox proportional hazard model revealed that undifferentiated cancers were associated with a low risk of synchronous or metachronous tumors after adjusting for confounding variables (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.287 [0.090-0.918]). CONCLUSIONS:The rate of synchronous or metachronous tumors after curative ESD was significantly lower for undifferentiated cancers compare to differentiated cancers. These findings suggest that ESD should be actively considered as a possible treatment for undifferentiated type EGCs.

There is insufficient data about the role of eradication of H. pylori after endoscopic resection (ER) for gastric dysplasia. The aim was to investigate the benefit of H. pylori eradication after ER in patients with gastric dysplasia to prevent metachronous gastric neoplasms.We retrospectively reviewed 1872 patients who underwent ER of gastric dysplasia. We excluded patients with a follow-up period of

Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is routinely performed under sedation, the difference in ESD performance according to sedation method is not well known. This study attempted to prospectively assess and compare the satisfaction of the endoscopists and patient stability during ESD between two sedation methods.One hundred and fifty-four adult patients scheduled for ESD were sedated by either the IMIE (intermittent midazolam/propofol injection by endoscopist) or CPIA (continuous propofol infusion by anesthesiologist) method. The primary endpoint of this study was to compare the level of satisfaction of the endoscopists between the two groups. The secondary endpoints included level of satisfaction of the patients, patient's pain scores, events interfering with the procedure, incidence of unintended deep sedation, hemodynamic and respiratory events, and ESD outcomes and complications.Level of satisfaction of the endoscopists was significantly higher in the CPIA Group compared to the IMIE group (IMIE vs. CPIA; high satisfaction score; 63.2% vs. 87.2%, P=0.001). The incidence of unintended deep sedation was significantly higher in the IMIE Group compared to the CPIA Group (IMIE vs. CPIA; 17.1% vs. 5.1%, P=0.018) as well as the number of patients showing spontaneous movement or those requiring physical restraint (IMIE vs. CPIA; spontaneous movement; 60.5% vs. 42.3%, P=0.024, physical restraint; 27.6% vs. 10.3%, P=0.006, respectively). In contrast, level of satisfaction of the patients were found to be significantly higher in the IMIE Group (IMIE vs. CPIA; high satisfaction score; 85.5% vs. 67.9%, P=0.027). Pain scores of the patients, hemodynamic and respiratory events, and ESD outcomes and complications were not different between the two groups.Continuous propofol and remifentanil infusion by an anesthesiologist during ESD can increase the satisfaction levels of the endoscopists by providing a more stable state of sedation.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01806753.

Aim: To determine whether there is a correlation between the location of the lesion and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) outcome., Methods: From January 2008 to December 2010, ESD of 1443 gastric tumors was performed. En bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, procedure time and complication rate were analyzed according to the tumor location., Results: The rates of en bloc resection and complete resection were 91% (1318/1443) and 89% (1287/1443), respectively. The post-ESD bleeding rate was 4.3%, and perforation rate was 2.7%. Tumors located in the upper third of the stomach were associated with a longer procedure time and significantly higher rates of incomplete resection, piecemeal resection, and perforation than tumors below the upper third of the stomach. Posterior wall lesions had significantly longer procedure times and higher rates of incomplete resection and piecemeal resection than lesions in other locations. In multivariate analysis, posterior wall lesions and upper third lesions were significantly associated with incomplete resection and perforation, respectively. In post-ESD bleeding analysis, location was not a significant related factor., Conclusion: More advanced endoscopic techniques are required during ESD for lesions located in the upper third or posterior wall of the stomach to decrease complications and improve therapeutic outcomes.

Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is now accepted for treatment of early gastric cancers (EGC) with negligible risk of lymph node (LN) metastasis, ESD for intramucosal undifferentiated type EGC without ulceration and with diameter ≤ 2 cm is regarded as an investigational treatment according to the Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines. This consideration was largely based on the analysis of surgically resected EGCs that contained undifferentiated type EGCs; however, results from several institutes showed some discrepancies in sample size and incidence of LN metastasis. Recently, some reports about the safety and efficacy of ESD for undifferentiated type EGC meeting the expanded criteria have been published. Nonetheless, only limited data are available regarding long-term outcomes of ESD for EGC with undifferentiated histology so far. At the same time, endoscopists cannot ignore the patients' desire to guarantee quality of life after the relatively non-invasive endoscopic treatment when compared to conventional surgery. To satisfy the needs of patients and provide solid evidence to support ESD for undifferentiated EGC, we need more delicate tools to predict undetected LN metastasis and more data that can reveal predictive factors for LN metastasis.