Comparison between tunneling and standard endoscopic submucosal dissection for treatment of large esophageal superficial neoplasm.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been established as a standard endoscopic method for treating esophageal superficial neoplasms, and it can be performed using a conventional or a tunneling method. The aim of the present study was to compare the safety and efficacy of tunneling ESD (t-ESD) and standard ESD (s-ESD) for treating large esophageal superficial neoplasms and to explore the risk factors for postoperative strictures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-five consecutive patients with large esophageal superficial neoplasms were treated by t-ESD or s-ESD. Demographics, lesion characteristics, procedure-related parameters, and follow-up results were retrospectively collected to compare the efficacy and safety of these procedures. Multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the potential risk factors for postoperative strictures.

RESULTS

Of the 55 patients, 13 underwent t-ESD and 42 underwent s-ESD. The dissection speed of t-ESD was significantly faster than that of s-ESD (7.42±1.99 min/cm2 vs. 9.01±2.11 min/cm2, P<0.05). En bloc resection was achieved in 98.2% (54/55) of the cases, while R0 resection was achieved in 92.7% (51/55). Curative resection was achieved in 78.2% (43/55) of the cases. Fourteen patients (25.5%) had postoperative strictures, which resolved with endoscopic dilation and/or stent insertion. Circumferential involvement of >3/4 and lesion length of >3 cm were independent risk factors for strictures.

CONCLUSIONS

T-ESD is a safe and effective method for treating large esophageal superficial neoplasms with a faster dissection speed than s-ESD, but postoperative strictures may be encountered for lesions involving more than three-fourths of the circumference or longer than 3 cm.