This review article summarizes knowledge about metachronous gastric cancer (MGC) occurring after curative endoscopic resection (ER) of early gastric cancer (EGC), treatment outcomes of patients who developed MGC, and efficacy of Helicobacter pylori eradication to prevent MGC. The incidence of MGC following curative ER increases over time and is higher than in patients undergoing gastrectomy. Increasing age and multifocal EGC are independent risk factors for developing MGC. An MGC following curative ER is usually a small ( < 20 mm) and differentiated intramucosal cancer. Most MGC lesions are found at an early stage on semiannual or annual surveillance endoscopy and are successfully treated by further ER, with excellent long-term outcomes. Eradication of H. pylori may reduce the risk of MGC following ER of EGC, but further prospective studies with long-term outcomes are required. Surveillance endoscopy following gastric ER should be continued indefinitely, due to the risk of MGC even after successful H. pylori eradication. Risk stratification and tailored endoscopic surveillance schedules need to be developed.
Appointments and Schedules ; Endoscopy ; Gastrectomy ; Helicobacter pylori ; Humans ; Incidence ; Prospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Stomach Neoplasms*

Background/Aims: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) of screening colonoscopies performed by trainees is often lower than that of colonoscopies performed by experts. The effcacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) in adenoma detection is well documented, especially that of CACs performed by trainees. Endocuff, a new endoscopic cap, is reportedly useful for adenoma detection; however, no trials have compared the effcacy of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) and CAC conducted by trainees. Therefore, the present study retrospectively compared the effcacy between EAC and CAC in trainees. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective study involving 305 patients who underwent either EAC or CAC performed by three trainees between January and December 2018. We evaluated the ADR, mean number of adenomas detected per patient (MAP), cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time, and occurrence of complications between the EAC and CAC groups. Results: The ADR was significantly higher in the EAC group than in the CAC group (54.3% vs. 37.3%, p=0.019), as was the MAP (1.36 vs. 0.74, p=0.003). No significant differences were found between the groups with respect to the cecal intubation rate or cecal intubation time. No major complications occurred in either group. Conclusions Our results suggest that EAC exhibits increased ADR and MAP compared to CAC when performed by trainees.