Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A modified cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (mEMR-C), introduced in this study, was a novel variation of the standard EMR. We aimed to compare the outcomes of mEMR-C and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the treatment of small (≤20 mm) intraluminal gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs). METHODS: This retrospective study included 43 patients who underwent mEMR-C and 156 patients who received ESD at Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital. Baseline characteristics, adverse events, and clinical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to adjust for confounders. After propensity score matching using sex, year, location, and tumor size, outcomes were compared with 41 patients in each group. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients underwent endoscopic resection and the en bloc resection rate was 100%. The complete resection rate was comparable in both groups ( P = 1.000). Approximately 9.5% of all patients had a positive margin. There was no significant difference in positive margin for patients undergoing mEMR-C or ESD (9.3% vs 9.6%, P = 1.000). No difference in adverse events in both groups ( P = 0.724). The mEMR-C was associated with shorter operation time and lower cost than the ESD. Recurrence was reported in 2 patients at 1 and 5 years after ESD during a median follow-up of 62 months. No metastasis and disease-related death were identified in both groups. Propensity score matching analysis revealed similar results. DISCUSSION: The mEMR-C was found to be the preferable technique for small (≤20 mm) intraluminal gGISTs with shorter operation time and lower cost as compared with ESD.