Dataset Information

Factors associated with overall survival in early gastric cancer patients who underwent additional surgery after endoscopic submucosal dissection.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Controversy exists about the benefit of additional surgery after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC).

Aim

To examine risk factors for overall survival (OS) after additional surgery in patients with EGC who initially underwent ESD.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of patients with EGC who underwent additional surgery after ESD at the Beijing Friendship Hospital affiliated to Capital Medical University between August 2012 and August 2019. OS was the primary outcome. Lymph node metastasis and residual tumor were secondary outcomes. Logistic regression models and Kaplan-Meier curves were used for further analysis.

Results

Forty-two patients were evaluated, including 35 (83.3%) males and 7(16.7%) females. The mean age was 62 (range, 32-82) years. Male sex [hazard ratio (HR) = 21.906, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.762-229.250; P = 0.039), T1b invasion (HR = 3.965, 95%CI: 1.109-17.432; P = 0.047), undifferentiated tumor (HR = 9.455, 95%CI: 0.946-29.482; P = 0.049), lymph node metastasis (HR = 2.126, 95%CI: 0.002-13.266; P = 0.031), and residual tumor (HR = 4.275, 95%CI: 1.049-27.420; P = 0.043) were independently associated with OS. The follow-up duration was 4-81 mo (median: 50.7 mo). OS was 77.0 ± 12.1 mo (95%CI: 53.3-100.7 mo). The 3-year and 5-year OS rates were 94.1% and 85%, respectively.

Conclusion

Male sex, T1b invasion, undifferentiated tumor, lymph node metastasis, and residual tumor are independently associated with OS in patients with EGC who underwent additional surgery after ESD.

SUBMITTER: Zheng Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8026836 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate the treatment effects of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early gastric cancer (EGC).DesignMeta-analysis.MethodsWe systematically searched three electronic databases, including PubMed, EmBase and the Cochrane library for studies published with inception to January 2018. The eligible studies should be evaluated for the efficacy and safety of ESD versus EMR for patients with EGC. The summary ORs and standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were employed as effect estimates. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of single study on overall analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed for investigated outcomes to evaluate the treatment effects of ESD versus EMR for patients with EGC with specific subsets.ResultsEighteen studies, with a total of 6723 patients with EGC, were included in final analysis. The summary ORs indicated that patients with EGC who received ESD were associated with an increased incidence of en bloc resection (OR: 9.00; 95% CI: 6.66 to 12.17; p<0.001), complete resection (OR: 8.43; 95% CI: 5.04 to 14.09; p<0.001) and curative resection (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.85 to 4.61; p<0.001) when compared with EMR. Furthermore, ESD was associated with lower risk of local recurrence (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.34; p<0.001). In addition, there was no significant difference between ESD and EMR for the risk of bleeding (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.80; p=0.203). Though, ESD was correlated with greater risk of perforation (OR: 2.55; 95% CI: 1.48 to 4.39; p=0.001), and longer operation time (SMD: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.13 to 2.10; p=0.026) as compared with EMR. Additionally, several different features observed in included studies and patients could bias the effectiveness of ESD versus EMR in patients with EGC.ConclusionsESD is superior than EMR for en bloc resection, complete resection, curative resection and local recurrence, while it increased perforation risk and longer operation time.