MRC Cancer Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Department of Gastroenterology, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge University NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Endoscopy. 2021 Mar;53(3):246-253. doi: 10.1055/a-1201-3125. Epub 2020 Jul 17.
Endoscopic surveillance is recommended in patients with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) who refuse or want to delay surgery. Because early signet-ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) can be inconspicuous, the current surveillance endoscopy protocol entails 30 random biopsies, which are time-consuming. This study aimed to compare single-bite and double-bite techniques in HDGC surveillance. METHODS : Between October 2017 and December 2018, consecutive patients referred for HDGC surveillance were prospectively randomized to the single- or double-bite arm. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield for SRCC foci. Secondary outcomes were: procedural time for random biopsies; comfort score; biopsy size; and quality of specimens, the latter assessed by the presence of muscularis mucosa, crush artifact, and proportion usable for diagnostic assessment. RESULTS : 25 patients were randomized to the single-bite arm and 23 to the double-bite arm. SRCC foci were detected in three and four patients in the single- and double-bite arms, respectively ( = 0.70). The procedural time for the double-bite arm (12 minutes, interquartile range [IQR] 4) was significantly shorter than for the single-bite arm (15 minute, IQR 6; = 0.01), but comfort scores were similar. The size of the biopsies in the double-bite arm was significantly smaller than in single-bite arm (2.5 mm vs. 3.0 mm; < 0.001) but this did not affect the presence of muscularis mucosa ( = 0.73), artifact level ( = 0.11), and diagnostic utility ( = 0.051). CONCLUSION : For patients undergoing HDGC surveillance, the double-bite technique is significantly faster than the single-bite technique. The diagnostic yield for SRCC and the biopsy quality were similar across both groups.
对于拒绝或希望延迟手术的遗传性弥漫性胃癌(HDGC)患者,建议进行内镜监测。由于早期印戒细胞癌(SRCC)可能不明显,目前的监测内镜方案需要进行 30 次随机活检,这既耗时又费力。本研究旨在比较 HDGC 监测中单咬和双咬技术。
在 2017 年 10 月至 2018 年 12 月期间,连续将转诊进行 HDGC 监测的患者前瞻性随机分为单咬或双咬组。主要结局是 SRCC 病灶的诊断率。次要结局包括:随机活检的程序时间;舒适度评分;活检大小;以及标本质量,后者通过存在黏膜肌、压碎伪影和用于诊断评估的可使用比例来评估。
25 例患者被随机分配到单咬臂,23 例患者被随机分配到双咬臂。单咬臂和双咬臂分别检测到 3 例和 4 例 SRCC 病灶( = 0.70)。双咬臂的程序时间(12 分钟,四分位距 [IQR] 4)明显短于单咬臂(15 分钟,IQR 6; = 0.01),但舒适度评分相似。双咬臂活检的大小明显小于单咬臂(2.5 毫米 vs. 3.0 毫米; < 0.001),但这并不影响黏膜肌的存在( = 0.73)、伪影水平( = 0.11)和诊断实用性( = 0.051)。
对于接受 HDGC 监测的患者,双咬技术明显快于单咬技术。两组 SRCC 的诊断率和活检质量相似。