Suppr超能文献

消除食管切除术的必要性:内镜治疗伴有早期食管肿瘤的巴雷特食管。

Eliminating a need for esophagectomy: endoscopic treatment of Barrett esophagus with early esophageal neoplasia.

作者信息

Lada Michal J, Watson Thomas J, Shakoor Aqsa, Nieman Dylan R, Han Michelle, Tschoner Andreas, Peyre Christian G, Jones Carolyn E, Peters Jeffrey H

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York.

Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York..

出版信息

Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Winter;26(4):274-84. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2014.12.004. Epub 2014 Dec 24.

Abstract

Over the past several years, endoscopic ablation and resection have become a new standard of care in the management of Barrett esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal adenocarcinoma (IMC). Risk factors for failure of endoscopic therapy and the need for subsequent esophagectomy have not been well elucidated. The aims of this study were to determine the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with or without endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the management of BE with HGD or IMC, to discern factors predictive of endoscopic treatment failure, and to assess the effect of endoscopic therapies on esophagectomy volume at our institution. Data were obtained retrospectively for all patients who underwent endoscopic therapies or esophagectomy for a diagnosis of BE with HGD or IMC in our department between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2012. Complete remission (CR) of BE or HGD or IMC was defined as 2 consecutive biopsy sessions without BE or HGD or IMC and no subsequent recurrence. Recurrence was defined by the return of BE or HGD or IMC after initial remission. Progression was defined as worsening of HGD to IMC or worsening of IMC to submucosal neoplasia or beyond. Overall, 57 patients underwent RFA with or without EMR for BE with HGD (n = 45) or IMC (n = 12) between 2007 and 2012, with a median follow-up duration of 35.4 months (range: 18.5-52.0 months). The 57 patients underwent 181 ablation sessions and more than half (61%) of patients underwent EMR as a component of treatment. There were no major procedural complications or deaths, with only 2 minor complications including 1 symptomatic stricture requiring dilation. Multifocal HGD or IMC was present in 43% (25/57) of patients. CR of IMC was achieved in 100% (12/12) at a median of 6.1 months, CR of dysplasia was achieved in 79% (45/57) at a median of 11.5 months, and CR of BE was achieved in 49% (28/57) at a median of 18.4 months. Following initial remission, 28% of patients (16/57) had recurrence of dysplasia (n = 12) or BE (n = 4). Progression to IMC occurred in 7% (4/57). All patients without CR continue endoscopic treatment. No patient required esophagectomy or developed metastatic disease. Overall, 6 patients died during the follow-up interval, none from esophageal cancer. Factors associated with failure to achieve CR of BE included increasing length of BE (6.0 ± 0.6 vs 4.0 ± 0.6cm, P = 0.03) and shorter duration of follow-up (28.5 ± 3.8 months vs 49.0 ± 5.8 months, P = 0.004). Shorter surveillance duration (17.8 ± 7.6 months vs 63.9 ± 14.4 months, P = 0.009) and shorter follow-up (21.1 ± 6.1 months vs 43.2 ± 4.1 months) were the only significant factors associated with failure to eradicate dysplasia. Our use of esophagectomy as primary therapy for BE with HGD or IMC has diminished since we began using endoscopic therapies in 2007. From a maximum of 16 esophagectomies per year for early Barrett neoplasia in 2006, we performed only 3 esophageal resections for such early disease in 2012, all for IMC, and we have not performed an esophagectomy for HGD since 2008. Although recurrence of BE or dysplasia/IMC was not uncommon, RFA with or without EMR ultimately resulted in CR of IMC in all patients, CR of HGD in the majority (79%), and CR of BE in nearly half (49%). No patient treated endoscopically for HGD or IMC subsequently required esophagectomy. In patients with BE with HGD or IMC, RFA and EMR are safe and highly effective. The use of endoscopic therapies appears justified as the new standard of care in most cases of BE with early esophageal neoplasia.

摘要

在过去几年中,内镜下消融和切除已成为治疗伴有高级别异型增生(HGD)或黏膜内腺癌(IMC)的巴雷特食管(BE)的新治疗标准。内镜治疗失败的风险因素以及后续食管切除术的必要性尚未得到充分阐明。本研究的目的是确定射频消融(RFA)联合或不联合内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)治疗伴有HGD或IMC的BE的疗效,识别预测内镜治疗失败的因素,并评估内镜治疗对我院食管切除术数量的影响。回顾性收集了2004年1月1日至2012年12月31日期间在我科因诊断为伴有HGD或IMC的BE而接受内镜治疗或食管切除术的所有患者的数据。BE或HGD或IMC的完全缓解(CR)定义为连续2次活检未发现BE或HGD或IMC且无后续复发。复发定义为初始缓解后BE或HGD或IMC再次出现。进展定义为HGD进展为IMC或IMC进展为黏膜下肿瘤或更严重情况。总体而言,2007年至2012年期间,57例伴有HGD(n = 45)或IMC(n = 12)的BE患者接受了RFA联合或不联合EMR治疗,中位随访时间为35.4个月(范围:18.5 - 52.0个月)。这57例患者共接受了181次消融治疗,超过一半(61%)的患者接受了EMR作为治疗的一部分。没有发生重大手术并发症或死亡,仅出现2例轻微并发症,包括1例需要扩张的有症状狭窄。43%(25/57)的患者存在多灶性HGD或IMC。IMC的CR在中位时间6.1个月时达到100%(12/12),异型增生的CR在中位时间11.5个月时达到79%(45/57),BE的CR在中位时间18.4个月时达到49%(28/57)。初始缓解后,28%的患者(16/57)出现异型增生(n = 12)或BE(n = 4)复发。进展为IMC的患者占7%(4/57)。所有未达到CR的患者继续接受内镜治疗。没有患者需要进行食管切除术或发生转移性疾病。总体而言,随访期间有6例患者死亡,均非死于食管癌。与BE未达到CR相关的因素包括BE长度增加(6.0 ± 0.6 vs 4.0 ± 0.6cm,P = 0.03)和随访时间较短(28.5 ± 3.8个月vs 49.0 ± 5.8个月,P = 0.004)。监测时间较短(17.8 ± 7.6个月vs 63.9 ± 14.4个月,P = 0.009)和随访时间较短(21.1 ± 6.1个月vs 43.2 ± 4.1个月)是与异型增生未根除相关的唯一显著因素。自2007年开始使用内镜治疗以来,我们将食管切除术作为伴有HGD或IMC的BE的主要治疗方法的使用减少了。2006年因早期巴雷特肿瘤每年最多进行16例食管切除术,2012年我们仅对这种早期疾病进行了3例食管切除术,均为IMC,自2008年以来我们未对HGD进行过食管切除术。尽管BE或异型增生/IMC的复发并不罕见,但RFA联合或不联合EMR最终使所有患者的IMC达到CR,大多数(79%)的HGD达到CR,近一半(49%)的BE达到CR。接受内镜治疗的HGD或IMC患者随后均无需进行食管切除术。对于伴有HGD或IMC的BE患者,RFA和EMR安全且高效。在内镜治疗似乎有理由作为大多数伴有早期食管肿瘤的BE病例的新治疗标准。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验