Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cohort study reveals high technical success and safety of endoscopic resection for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions, indicating it is an effective minimally invasive treatment.
Submucosal tunneling techniques have expanded the horizon of therapeutic endoscopy. One such procedure, submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER), enables the endoscopic removal of gastrointestinal (GI) sub-epithelial tumors. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of STER in patients with sub-epithelial lesions localized to the upper GI tract. Consecutive subjects with a sub-epithelial lesion of ≥ 1 cm size in the upper GI tract were enrolled in the study. STER was performed using the standard technique in an endoscopy suite. A modified technique (double-opening STER) was used in cases with difficult en bloc resection of the tumor. Outcome measures included technical success, en bloc resection rates, adverse events, and recurrence. A total of 104 patients with sub-epithelial tumors were evaluated for STER. Of them, 44 subjects (mean age 44.68 ± 12.82, 52.3% males) underwent standard STER. Majority (31, 70.4%) of the lesions were located in the esophagus and cardia. Technical success and en bloc removal of the tumor were achieved in 97.7% and 88.4% of cases, respectively. There was no major adverse event. Minor adverse events were recorded in 7 (15.9%) cases. Majority (31, 70.4%) of the tumors originated from muscularis propria, followed by submucosa (8, 18.2%) and muscularis mucosa (5, 11.4%). The most common histological diagnosis was leiomyoma (59.1%) followed by GI stromal tumors (20.4%). At a mean follow up of 12.36 ± 7.63 months, there was no incidence of tumor recurrence in en bloc as well as piecemeal resection groups. STER is a safe and efficacious procedure for sub-epithelial tumors in the upper GI tract. Novel strategies need to be developed to ensure en bloc removal of large lesions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bowler et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: