Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and video-assisted thoracoscopic enucleation for esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer: a randomized controlled trial
- PMID: 29340815
- DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6057-8
Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and video-assisted thoracoscopic enucleation for esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer: a randomized controlled trial
Erratum in
-
Correction to: Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and video-assisted thoracoscopic enucleation for esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer: a randomized controlled trial.Surg Endosc. 2018 Jul;32(7):3373. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6147-7. Surg Endosc. 2018. PMID: 29572628
Abstract
Background and aims: Surgical resection is considered the first treatment option for submucosal tumors (SMTs) originating from the muscularis propria layer while submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) is proved to be a safe and effective method for treating SMTs. This study aimed to compare video-assisted thoracoscopic enucleation (VATE) with STER for treating esophageal SMTs.
Methods: Sixty-six patients with small esophageal SMTs were prospectively randomized from July 2014 to December 2015. After exclusion of 8 patients, 58 subjects scheduled for STER or VATE were enrolled. Clinicopathological, endoscopic, and adverse events (AEs) data were collected and analyzed between STER and VATE.
Results: Forty-six males and 12 females with a mean age of 46.1 ± 9.4 years were randomized to the STER (n = 30) and VATE (n = 28) groups, respectively. Demographics and lesion features were similar between the two groups. Median procedure time was shorter in the STER group than the VATE group (44.5 vs. 106.5 min, P < 0.001); cost was lower in the STER group (4499.46 vs. 6137.32 USD, P = 0.010). Median decrease in hemoglobin levels post-procedure was - 1.6 g/L in the STER group and 14.7 g/L after VATE (P = 0.001). Lower postoperative pain scores were found in the STER group compared with the VATE group (2 vs. 4, P < 0.001). No recurrent or residual tumors were found in either group. En bloc resection rates, complete resection rates, hospital times, and post-procedure AEs were similar between two groups. The en bloc resection rates for SMTs < 20.0 mm were 100% in both groups while STER achieved only 71.4% en bloc resection rate for SMTs ≥ 20.0 mm.
Conclusion: STER and VATE are comparably effective for esophageal SMTs; however, STER is superior to VATE with shorter operation time and decreased cost, and seems safer than VATE. STER is recommended for SMTs < 20.0 mm while VATE is recommended for SMTs with a transverse diameter > 35.0 mm. Clinical trail registration statement: This study is registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=4814 . The registration identification number is ChiCTR-TRC-14004759. The registration date is April 30, 2014.
Keywords: Muscularis propria; Submucosal tumor; Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection; Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.
Similar articles
-
The retrospective comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and endoscopic submucosal excavation for managing esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer.Surg Endosc. 2020 Jan;34(1):417-428. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06785-z. Epub 2019 Apr 10. Surg Endosc. 2020. PMID: 30972622
-
Factors affecting the effectiveness and safety of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer.Surg Endosc. 2018 Mar;32(3):1255-1264. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5800-x. Epub 2017 Aug 25. Surg Endosc. 2018. PMID: 28842802
-
Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for large esophageal leiomyoma originating from the muscularis propria layer.Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):3121-7. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4567-1. Epub 2015 Oct 20. Surg Endosc. 2016. PMID: 26487221
-
Efficacy and safety of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors with more than 1-year' follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scand J Gastroenterol. 2019 Apr;54(4):397-406. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2019.1591500. Epub 2019 Mar 29. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2019. PMID: 30925071
-
Submucosal Tunneling Endoscopic Resection.Surg Clin North Am. 2020 Dec;100(6):1201-1214. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2020.08.016. Epub 2020 Oct 10. Surg Clin North Am. 2020. PMID: 33128889 Review.
Cited by
-
Endoscopic resection for subepithelial lesions-pure endoscopic full-thickness resection and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection.Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 May 25;4:39. doi: 10.21037/tgh.2019.05.01. eCollection 2019. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019. PMID: 31231706 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Consensus on the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique.World J Gastroenterol. 2019 Feb 21;25(7):744-776. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i7.744. World J Gastroenterol. 2019. PMID: 30809078 Free PMC article.
-
Feasibility and Safety of Mark-Guided Submucosal Tunneling Endoscopic Resection for Treatment of Esophageal Submucosal Tumors Originating from the Muscularis Propria: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Jun 30;2021:9916927. doi: 10.1155/2021/9916927. eCollection 2021. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021. PMID: 34307239 Free PMC article.
-
Endoscopic resection: A novel approach for treating oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours.World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2025 Jun 16;17(6):107088. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v17.i6.107088. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2025. PMID: 40547551 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy and safety of esophageal submucosal tumors treated with internal traction method-assisted submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection: a single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled study.Surg Endosc. 2023 Apr;37(4):2873-2884. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09813-7. Epub 2022 Dec 12. Surg Endosc. 2023. PMID: 36509948 Clinical Trial.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous