Comparison of Clinicopathological Features Between Synchronous Multiple and Solitary Early Gastric Cancer and Relevance of Major and Minor Lesions of Synchronous Multiple Cancers
10.3969/j.issn.1008-7125.2019.08.002
- VernacularTitle: 同时性多发与单发早期胃癌临床病理特征比较以及多发癌病灶关联性分析
- Author:
Rongxue LI
1
Author Information
1. Beijing Key Laboratory for Precancerous Lesion of Digestive Diseases, Faculty of Gastroenterology of Capital Medical University
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Clinicopathological Features;
Early Gastric Cancer;
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection;
Neoplasms, Multiple Primary;
Stomach Neoplasms
- From:
Chinese Journal of Gastroenterology
2019;24(8):454-459
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Background: The detection rate of early gastric cancer has been increasing over recent decades, but synchronous multiple early gastric cancer (SMEGC) remains a challenge for endoscopists. It is important to improve the endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of SMEGC. Aims: To investigate the clinicopathological features of SMEGC and the correlation of its major and minor lesions. Methods: The medical records of 231 consecutive early gastric cancer patients treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in Beijing Friendship Hospital from Jun. 2013 to Dec. 2018 were retrospectively analyzed for comparing the clinical, endoscopic, pathological features and treatment outcome between solitary early gastric cancer (SEGC) and SMEGC. The relevance of major and minor lesions of SMEGC in endoscopic and pathological features was also analyzed. Results: Of the 231 early gastric cancer patients, 16 (6.9%) were SMEGC (34 lesions). The gender, age, and family history of GI tumors were comparable between SEGC and SMEGC (P>0.05). Furthermore, lesions of these two groups did not differ in tumor size, vertical location, histological differentiation, depth of invasion, and mucosal background (P>0.05). With respect to horizontal location and macroscopic type, SMEGC lesions were more often located in posterior wall (38.2%) and presented as elevated type (47.1%) as compared with SEGC lesions (P<0.05). All SMEGC lesions were differentiated type. The major and minor lesions of SMEGC were correlated in characteristics of macroscopic type (r=0.658, P<0.05) and histological differentiation (r=0.489, P<0.05), the concordance rates of these two aspects and depth of invasion were 68.8%, 81.2%, and 87.5%, respectively. The mucosal background of major and minor lesions was identical. The curative resection rates were comparable between SEGC and SMEGC (86.0% vs. 85.3%, P>0.05). Conclusions: SMEGC and SEGC have similar clinicopathological features. The major and minor lesions of SMEGC are consistent in characteristics of macroscopic type, histological differentiation, depth of invasion, and mucosal background. ESD is a feasible treatment for SMEGC.
