Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Jan;71(1):188-94.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.07.029. Epub 2009 Oct 30.

Endoscopic partial resection with the unroofing technique for reliable tissue diagnosis of upper GI subepithelial tumors originating from the muscularis propria on EUS (with video)

Chang Kyun Lee  1 , Il-Kwun Chung, Suck-Ho Lee, Sae Hwan Lee, Tae Hoon Lee, Sang-Heum Park, Hong-Soo Kim, Sun-Joo Kim, Hyun-Deuk Cho
Affiliations

Endoscopic partial resection with the unroofing technique for reliable tissue diagnosis of upper GI subepithelial tumors originating from the muscularis propria on EUS (with video)

Chang Kyun Lee et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Jan.

Abstract

Background: There is a growing body of evidence that a pathological diagnosis is necessary for small (<3 cm in diameter), asymptomatic, hypoechoic, subepithelial tumors (SETs) originating from the muscularis propria on EUS. However, the diagnostic efficacy of current tissue sampling techniques appears to be limited.

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic yield and safety of endoscopic partial resection using the unroofing technique (EPR-UT) in a subset of patients.

Design: A prospective case series.

Setting: A single tertiary-care referral center.

Patients: Between August 2007 and March 2009, 16 patients with hypoechoic SETs of <3 cm in diameter, originating from the muscularis propria on EUS (14 gastric and 2 esophageal lesions), underwent EPR-UT.

Interventions: The overlying mucosa was removed by using the unroofing technique using a conventional snare with electrical current to expose the tumor sufficiently. Next, the exposed tumor was partially resected by snaring.

Main outcome measurements: The diagnostic yield and safety of this method.

Results: EPR-UT provided specimens that were sufficient for a diagnosis and the assessment of risk for malignancy in 15 out of 16 cases (diagnostic yield 93.7% [95% CI, 80.4%-100.0%]). The pathological diagnoses were leiomyoma (7 of 15, 46.6%), GI stromal tumor (6 of 15, 40.0%), aberrant pancreas (1 of 15, 6.6%), and well-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (1 of 15, 6.6%). Six cases with GI stromal tumor were classified as very low risk for malignant potential (mitotic index <5/50 high-power fields). Procedural blood oozing was relatively common (9 of 16, 56.0% [95% CI, 33.0%-77.0%]); however, this minor complication was easily controlled by argon plasma coagulation. There were no procedure-related major complications (0 of 16, 0% [95% CI, 0.0%-23.0%]).

Limitations: Single-center, noncomparative study with small sample size.

Conclusion: EPR-UT appears to be simple, safe, and effective for determining the definite pathological diagnosis and assessing malignant potential of small, hypoechoic SETs originating from the muscularis propria on EUS.

PubMed Disclaimer