A comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and radical surgery for early XXXX : a retrospective study.

@entity1 @entity548 @entity5 @entity344 @entity86 @entity3621 @entity356
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become one of the mainstays of treatment for early @entity356 (EGC). Radical surgery is also a classical treatment method for EGC. There have been no systematic clinical studies of the curative effects and adverse events associated with ESD vs. radical surgery for EGC. This study investigated the therapeutic efficacy and safety of ESD and radical surgery for EGC. METHODS: Twenty-nine @entity1 with EGC underwent ESD, and 59 underwent radical surgery at Weihai Municipal Hospital. The pathological characteristics, postoperative outcomes, hospital course, morbidity and mortality were retrospectively compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The oncological clearance was 93.1  % (27/29) in the ESD group. Postoperative delayed @entity548 occurred in two @entity1 . The hospital stay ranged from 10 to 23  days, and the average stay was 14.3        3.7  days. The @entity1 were followed-up for 1 to 5  years, with a mean follow-up of 26.9        8.5  months. Regular endoscopic examinations showed that the wound had healed with no @entity5 recurrence in all of the @entity1 . In the radical surgery group, the oncological clearance was 100  % (59/59). The hospital stay ranged from 11 to 55  days, and the average stay was 21.7        9.3  days. The @entity1 were followed-up for 1 to 3.7  years, with a mean follow-up of 22.3        9.4  months. Nine @entity1 developed complications, including acute @entity86 (1/59) and symptomatic residual @entity3621 (3/59). These complications were improved by an additional operation, @entity344 and comprehensive therapy. CONCLUSIONS: ESD achieved similar efficacy and had many advantages compared with radical surgery for the treatment of EGC.
