Small Gastric Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Research Articles

Endoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor using clip-and-cut endoscopic full-thickness resection: a single-center, retrospective cohort in Korea.

To overcome the technical limitations of classic endoscopic resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), various methods have been developed. In this study, we examined the role and feasibility of clip-and-cut procedures (clip-and-cut endoscopic full-thickness resection [cc-EFTR]) for gastric GISTs. Medical records of 83 patients diagnosed with GISTs after endoscopic resection between 2005 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Moreover, clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and cc-EFTR were performed in 51 and 32 patients, respectively. The GISTs were detected in the upper third of the stomach for ESD (52.9%) and cc-EFTR (90.6%). Within the cc-EFTR group, a majority of GISTs were located in the deep muscularis propria or serosal layer, accounting for 96.9%, as opposed to those in the ESD group (45.1%). The R0 resection rates were 51.0% and 84.4% in the ESD and cc-EFTR groups, respectively. Seven (8.4%) patients required surgical treatment (six patients underwent ESD and one underwent cc-EFTR,) due to residual tumor (n=5) and post-procedure adverse events (n=2). Patients undergoing R0 or R1 resection experienced recurrence during a median 14-month follow-up period, except for one patient in the ESD group. Cc-EFTR displayed high R0 resection rates as the procedure safely and successfully removed small gastric GISTs.

Gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: therapeutic strategies and long-term prognosis

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and prognostic characteristics of primary gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). Methods Patients who underwent resection for primary gastric GIST between January 2002 and December 2017 were included. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was calculated by Kaplan–Meier analysis, and Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent prognostic factors. Results Altogether, 653 patients were enrolled. The median patient age was 59 years (range 15-86 years). Open, laparoscopic, and endoscopic resections were performed in 394 (60.3%), 105 (16.1%), and 154 (23.6%) patients, respectively. According to the modified NIH consensus classification, 132 (20.2%), 245 (37.5%), 166 (25.4%), and 88 (13.5%) patients were categorized into very low-, low-, intermediate-, and high-risk, respectively. A total of 136 (20.8%) patients received adjuvant imatinib treatment. The median follow-up time was 78 months (range 4–219 months), and the estimated 5-year RFS rate was 93.0%. In all patients, tumor size and rupture, mitotic counts, and adjuvant imatinib treatment were independent prognostic factors. The prognosis of gastric GIST treated with endoscopic resection was not significantly different from that of laparoscopic or open resection after adjusting for covariates using propensity score matching (log-rank p = .558). Adjuvant imatinib treatment (HR = 0.151, 95%CI 0.055–0.417, p < .001) was a favorable prognostic factor for high-risk patients, but was not associated with prognosis in intermediate-risk patients. Conclusion Patients with small gastric GISTs who successfully underwent endoscopic resection may have a favorable prognosis. Adjuvant imatinib treatment improve the prognosis of high-risk gastric GISTs, however, its use in intermediate-risk patients remains controversial.

Endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumor: The role of clip-and-cut endoscopic full-thickness resection.

399 Background: To overcome the technical limitations of classic endoscopic resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), various methods have been developed. We analyzed the results of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and clip-and-cut endoscopic full-thickness resection (CASE), a modified full-thickness resection method for gastric GISTs to identify the role and its feasibility of CASE. Methods: The medical records of 83 patients diagnosed with GISTs after ER in 2005–2021 were retrospectively reviewed. ESD and CASE were performed in 51 and 32 patients. The clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. Results: The GISTs were mainly found in the upper third of stomach for ESD (52.9%) and CASE (90.6%). In CASE group, there was a tendency that the most of GISTs were in deep muscularis propria or serosal layer (96.9%) compared to ESD group (45.1%). The R0 resection rates were 51.0% in ESD and 84.4% in CASE group, respectively. Perforation during procedure was frequently found in CASE group (25.5% vs. 68.8%), however only three patients were progressed to peritonitis. Seven cases (8.4%) required surgical treatment (6 ESD, 1 CASE) due to residual tumor (n=5), and post-procedure adverse events (n=2). No R0 or R1 resected cases experienced recurrence during the median 14-month follow-up except for one patient in ESD group. Conclusions: CASE showed higher R0 resection rate and was useful and safe in removing small gastric GISTs.

Tissue diagnosis necessary for small endoscopic ultrasound-suspected gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors 2cm or less in size: A prospective study focusing on the endoscopic incisional biopsy.

The small endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-suspected gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), gastric subepithelial tumors at the muscularis propria layer on EUS, are detected frequently. Bite-on-bite forceps biopsy and EUS-guided tissue sampling yield variable results. This study aimed to analyze clinicopathologic features of the small EUS-suspected gastric GISTs 2cm or less in size and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the endoscopic incisional biopsy (EIB) for these small tumors. This prospective study investigated 70 patients with small EUS-suspected gastric GISTs 2cm or less in size in two stages. Firstly, 30 patients were recruited for the efficacy and safety evaluation of the EIB. Secondly, 40 patients were randomly assigned to receive either EIB or the bite-on-bite biopsy for comparison of the diagnostic yield, procedure time, and adverse event rate. Combining two study stages, leiomyoma (74%) was diagnosed histologically to outnumber GIST (26%) with a diagnostic rate of 94% for patients receiving EIB. KIT exon 11 mutations (50%) and PDGFRA exon 12 mutations (16%) were detected in the small gastric GISTs. In the direct comparison, the diagnostic yield of EIB and the bite-on-bite biopsy was 85% and 50%, respectively (P=0.018). There was no statistically significant difference of the mean procedure time or adverse event rate between these two groups. Leiomyoma is more common than expected among these small tumors. Tissue diagnosis with an effective and safe sampling technique, such as EIB, is necessary for making further clinical decisions.

Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Cooperative Dissection for Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor without Causing Injury to the Mucosa.

Objective To investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative dissection (LECD) for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) without causing injury to the mucosa, compared with ESD surgery which is widely used now. Methods A total of 25 patients with small gastric GISTs who underwent LECD and 20 patients with small gastric GISTs who underwent ESD between October 2014 and June 2016 were included in this study. All patients underwent curative resection for pathologically diagnosed small gastric GISTs. Patients' clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Results In LECD group, the operation was successfully performed in all patients. However, in the ESD group, three patients were transferred to laparoscopic surgery due to intraoperative massive bleeding or intraoperative perforation. No additional targeted chemotherapy drugs for interstitial tumors were prescribed in two groups. There was no difference in the complete tumor capsule rate (100% vs. 90%, p = 0.11), operation time (80.76 ± 13.86 ml vs. 84.05 ± 15.33 ml, p = 0.45), major intraoperative bleeding (0 vs. 5%, p = 0.26), postoperative bleeding (0 vs. 10%, p = 0.11), and postoperative infection (0 vs. 10%, p = 0.11) between the two groups. Compared to ESD (endoscopic submucosal dissection), LECS patients had shorter postoperative indwelling gastric tube (1.04 ± 0.98 d vs. 2.85 ± 0.24 d, p < 0.01), earlier postoperative eating (1.96 ± 0.98 d vs. 3.50 ± 1.15 d, p < 0.01), shorter average postoperative hospital stay (3.44 ± 1.00 d vs. 7.85 ± 1.18 d, p < 0.01), smaller perforation rate (0 vs. 25%, p < 0.05), and fewer surgical supplies. No recurrence or metastasis cases were found between the two groups during the follow-up period, and there were no cases of death due to gastric GISTs. Conclusion LECD is a novel surgery for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors that leads to satisfactory short-term outcomes and meets the idea of minimally invasive surgery and rapid recovery; compared with ESD, LECD surgery has some advantages in clinical practice. However, further follow-up is needed to confirm.

Mo1326 TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SMALL GASTRIC GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS: POSITIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION

To reevaluate the risk potential of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) less than 2 cm, and assess the safety and efficacy of their endoscopic resection, and discuss the treatment strategy of small gastric GISTs.

Clinicopathological Features and Prognosis of Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GISTs)

BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety of endoscopic surgery, the clinicopathological features, and prognoses of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). MethodsSmall gastric GIST patients (diameter: 0.10–2.00 cm) resected endoscopically in Zhongshan Hospital were retrospectively identified and clinicopathological features and outcomes were collected. The relationship between clinicopathological characteristics and tumor recurrence was analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine the optimal tumor diameter for predicting malignant potential. ResultsAll lesions were completely removed by endoscopy and En bloc resection was 98.5%. The most frequent location was the gastric fundus (60.3%) and the average diameter of all lesions was 1.20 cm (range: 0.10–2.00 cm). Mitoses were calculated as more than 5/50 HPF in 44 (6.8%) patients and nuclear atypia was moderate in 243 (37.5%) patients, severe in 1 (0.2%). Necrosis, mucosal infiltration, and vascular infiltration were detected in 8 (1.2%), 5 (0.7%), and 3 (0.5%) patients, respectively. Tumor size was positively correlated with mitotic index (P < 0.001) and nuclear atypia (P < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 54 months, four patients were confirmed local recurrence. ROC curve analysis identified 1.45 cm as the best cut-off value to predict malignant potential (95% CI: 0·694–0·774). Survival analysis showed that patients with tumor diameters larger than 1.45 cm were associated with more local recurrences after resection (P = 0.011). ConclusionsEndoscopic surgery is feasible and safe for small gastric GISTs, especially those in favorable locations. Small gastric GISTs bear a good prognosis as a whole but those with diameters larger than 1.45 cm should receive more intensive surveillance or undergo endoscopic surgery.

Treatment recommendations for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: positive endoscopic resection

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection and discuss the treatment strategy of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) less than 2 cm.Material and methods: The data of 713 patients, who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs), were retrospectively analyzed. We investigated the clinicopathological features and analyzed the risk potential of small gastric GISTs, and documented therapeutic and follow-up outcomes. We also compared the follow-up results between operated patients and 58 patients who were suspected of small gastric GISTs and underwent regular surveillance under endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the same period.Results: GISTs were the most common gastric SMTs (289 cases, 40.5%), of which small GISTs were found in 250 cases. The mitotic index was less than 5 in all cases. However, 122 out of 250 cases (48.8%) had adverse factors under EUS, which were related to tumor size (p < .01). ESD was successfully performed in all patients, and no serious complication or perioperative death occurred. The follow-up period for 42.07 ± 22.49 months revealed improvement of symptoms in 80.2% patients and showed no recurrence or metastasis. Of the 58 patients selected for EUS surveillance, 48 (82.8%) presented with gastrointestinal symptoms and 41 out of 48 (85.4%) were not relieved during follow-up and 16 (27.6%) with severe psychological problems.Conclusions: ESD is a safe and effective treatment for small GISTs, which helps to confirm the diagnosis, improve symptoms and reduce the psychological pressure. Thus, we recommend endoscopic resection is a good option for small gastric GISTs once diagnosed.

Comparison of Safety and Outcomes between Endoscopic and Surgical Resections of Small (≤ 5 cm) Primary Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

Background and aims: Endoscopic resection is increasingly performed for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). However, the safety and outcomes remain elusive. We aimed in this retrospective study to compare operative complications and prognosis between endoscopically and surgically resected small (≤ 5 cm) GIST tumor groups.Methods: In this single-center retrospective study, we compared demographics, clinical outcomes, and the R0 resection rate between the endoscopy (n =268) and surgery (n =141) groups. Only GIST tumors in size of ≤ 5.0 cm were recruited for this comparison study.Results: Overall, the mean age of patients was 59.0 years (range: 31.0-83.0). The male-female ratio was 0.68. The most common site of GIST was, in the descending order, the gastric fundus (55%), corpus (27.6%), cardia (10.8%), and antrum (6.6%). Compared with the surgery group, GIST tumors in the endoscopy group were significantly smaller (1.69±0.9 cm, vs. 3.20±1.2 cm in the surgery group; P <0.001) in size; postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (4.66±1.5 days, vs. 8.11±5.0; P <0.001); post-resection time to first liquid diet was significantly shorter (1.94±1.1 days, vs. 4.63±2.6; P < 0.001); the incidence of operative and post-operative complications was significantly fewer (p < 0.05), and hospital costs were significantly lower (20115.4±5113.5¥, vs. 43378.4±16795.7¥; P < 0.001). The R0 resection rate was significantly lower in the endoscopy (93.3%) than in the surgery (99.3%) groups (P< 0.01). In the endoscopy group, 176 (65.7%) and 69 (25.7%) patients were found to be at very low and low risk of aggressiveness, respectively, in comparison to 27(19.2%) and 86 (61.0%) patients in the surgery group, respectively (P <0.001). Among 409 cases, 50 (12.2%) were found to be at intermediate or high risk of aggressiveness, 20 of which were treated with adjuvant imatinib therapy and but only 8/20 taking imatinib for 1 to 3 months because of side effects and high costs. No local or distant tumor recurrence was observed over an average of 33.5-month follow-ups. Two patients died of other disease in the surgery group.Conclusions: Endoscopic resection of selected small gastric GISTs (≤ 5cm) was feasible, safe, and associated with better intraoperative results and an equal postoperative course, compared to surgical resection.

Suggested cutoff tumor size for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Background: To investigate if there is an appropriate cutoff tumor size for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) or not, and whether the cutoff size could be used to predict the tumor progression for small gastric GISTs during follow-up. Methods: From May 2010 to March 2014, 97 patients were enrolled in the present study, including 90 small gastric GIST patients underwent resection, and 7 endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) suspected small gastric GIST patients. The cutoff tumor size of small gastric GISTs was calculated based on mitotic index using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: Of the 90 patients, mitotic index of 18 small gastric GISTs (20%) exceeded 5/50 HPF. Using ROC analysis, we found that 1.4 cm may be considered as an appropriate cutoff tumor size. The ratio of CT enhancement, tumor ulceration, mitotic index exceeds 5/50 HPF and low risk category was significantly higher in tumors between 1.4 and 2.0 cm than that of tumors less than 1.4 cm (all P<0.05). EUS suspected small gastric GISTs between 1.4 and 2.0 cm showed significant tumor progression during follow-up (median 11.8 months, range from 10.1 to 24.5 months). Conclusions: The 1.4-cm may be considered as a more reasonable cutoff tumor size for small gastric GISTs. We recommended that all small gastric GISTs should be resected once diagnosed, at least for tumors between 1.4 and 2.0 cm.

Comparison of Endoscopic and Open Resection for Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends conservative follow-up for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) less than 2 cm. We have previously reported that the mitotic index of 22.22% of small gastric GISTs exceeded 5 per 50 high-power fields and recommended that all small gastric GISTs should be resected once diagnosed. The aim of the present study is to compare the safety and outcomes of endoscopic and open resection of small gastric GISTs. From May 2010 to March 2014, a total of 90 small gastric GIST patients were enrolled in the present study, including 40 patients who underwent surgical resection and 50 patients who underwent endoscopic resection. The clinicopathological characteristics, resection-related factors, and clinical outcomes were recorded and analyzed. The clinicopathological characteristics were comparable between the two groups except for tumor location and DOG-1 expression. Compared with the surgical resection group, the operation time was shorter (P = .000), blood loss was less (P = .000), pain intensity was lower (P < .05), duration of first flatus and defecation was shorter (P < .05), and medical cost of hospitalization was lower (P = .027) in the endoscopic resection group. The complications and postoperative hospital stay were comparable between the two groups. No in situ recurrence or liver metastasis was observed during follow-up. Endoscopic resection of small gastric GISTs is safe and feasible compared with surgical resection, although perforation could not be totally avoided during and after resection. The clinical outcome of endoscopic resection is also favorable.

Surgical resection should be taken into consideration for the treatment of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors

BackgroundThe National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends conservative follow-up for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) less than 2 cm. The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical and pathological features of small gastric GISTs, re-evaluate the risk potential, and discuss the treatment strategy of small gastric GISTs.MethodsIn this retrospective study, 63 cases of small gastric GISTs (less than 2 cm) were resected surgically from May 2010 to March 2013 in our department. Clinicopathological factors were collected and the malignant potential of small gastric GISTs was analyzed.ResultsThe mitotic index of 14 out of 63 cases (22.22%) exceeded 5. The malignant potential of small gastric GISTs was related to tumor location (P = 0.0218). The mitotic index of 4 out of 8 GISTs (50%) located in gastric cardia exceeded 5, 8 out 28 GISTs (28.57%) located in the gastric fundus exceeded 5, and only 2 out of 27 GISTs (7.41%) located in the gastric body exceeded 5. We also discovered a good consistency between mitotic index and Ki-67 expression of small gastric GISTs.ConclusionsGastric GISTs less than 2 cm also have malignant potential. Thus, we recommended surgical resection of all small gastric GISTs once diagnosed.

Predictors of Recurrence After Resection of Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors of 5 cm or Less

To evaluate the recurrence predicting factors of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) through the long-term follow-up after surgical/endoscopic resection. Although small gastric GISTs are known to have a low risk of recurrence after complete resection, the prognostic factors are not well known. The study retrospectively analyzed the records of 136 patients with primary gastric GISTs of 5 cm or less without metastasis who underwent surgical/endoscopic resection between March 1997 and December 2008 at the Asan Medical Center, and who were followed-up for at least 3 months after resection. Specimens were assessed for tumor size, mitotic index, and microscopic resection margin. Specimen sections were immunohistochemically stained to determine the levels of expression of the cell cycle proteins p53, p16(INK4), pRb, cyclin D1, and Ki-67. DNA was extracted from high-risk tumors to analyze for KIT mutations. Among 136 patients, 5 (3.7%) patients with tumors with a high mitotic index showed recurrence at a median 23 months post resection. None of 14 patients with microscopic positive resection margins showed recurrence during a median follow-up time of 32 months. A high mitotic index was a predictor of recurrence (P<0.001), but that tumor size, method of resection, or margin status were not. In addition, abnormal p53 expression was found to be associated with recurrence (P=0.004). All assessable high-risk tumors had a KIT exon 11 mutation. Predictors of recurrence of gastric GISTs of 5 cm or less were a high mitotic index and abnormal p53 expression. A positive microscopic resection margin was not associated with recurrence.