4.3 Article

Early detection of recurrence after endoscopic treatment for early gastric cancer

Journal

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 9, Pages 1109-1114

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00365520903121701

Keywords

early detection; endoscopic submucosal dissection; early gastric cancer; recurrence

Funding

  1. Dong-A University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. Although there have been many reports regarding clinical outcomes of endoscopic treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC), little is known about detection of recurrence after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This study aims to clarify the clinical value of serological marker or imaging tools, including conventional CT and PET-CT scans, in detecting recurrent gastric cancer after ESD in Korea. Material and methods. From July 2004 to March 2008, 212 patients who had received ESD for EGC were enrolled in the study. For preoperative staging, conventional CT and PET-CT scans were performed in 141 patients, and for detection of recurrence of cancer, conventional CT, PET-CT scans and tumour marker; CEA, CA19-9, AFP were checked in 165 patients. Results. The local recurrence rate was 4.7% (10/212) during the study period. At 9 months after endoscopic treatment, 3 cases recurred. Four showed recurrence at 12 months, 2 at 18 months and 1 at 24 months. The positive rate was 7.1% (10/141) in conventional CT and 0% (0/24) in PET-CT scans for preoperative staging. Conventional CT and PET-CT scans could not detect local recurrence of cancer during the follow-up period. Tumour markers did not show any significant correlation with recurrence of cancer. Conclusions. The study suggests that conventional CT, PET-CT scans and tumour marker have no role in the primary surveillance of early gastric cancer and/or in detecting recurrence after endoscopic treatment. For early diagnosis of recurrence after endoscopic treatment, a biopsy specimen from the endoscopic examination has to be obtained at regular intervals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available