Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus esophagectomy for t1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis. (November 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Qian, Meng; Feng, Shuo; Zhou, Hangcheng; Chen, Lijie; Wang, Song; Zhang, Kaiguang
• Is Part Of: Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology. Volume 15(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-11
• Subjects: endoscopic submucosal dissection -- esophagectomy -- outcomes -- superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Digestive organs -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal system -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Liver -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Pharmacology -- Periodicals; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal Diseases -- therapy -- Periodicals; Liver Diseases -- therapy -- Periodicals; Pharmacology -- Periodicals; Gastroentérologie -- Périodiques; Appareil digestif -- Maladies -- Traitement -- Périodiques; Tractus gastro-intestinal -- Maladies -- Traitement -- Périodiques; Hépatologie -- Périodiques; Foie -- Maladies -- Périodiques; Pharmacologie -- Périodiques; 616.3005
• DOI: 10.1177/17562848221138156
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1756-283X

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been a preferred treatment option for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). Objectives: To compare the outcomes of ESD and esophagectomy in the treatment of SESCC, especially for lesions invading muscularis mucosa or submucosa (pT1a-MM/T1b). Design: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with SESCC who underwent ESD or esophagectomy between 2015 and 2021. Methods: After propensity score matching, overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and treatment-related events were compared between the ESD and esophagectomy groups. Furthermore, we performed a Cox regression analysis to identify factors associated with survival. Results: OS and DSS were significantly higher in the ESD group ( n = 508) than that in the esophagectomy group ( n = 466). After matching, 404 patients (202 per group) were included in the study. No significant differences were found between the ESD and esophagectomy groups in OS ( p = 0.566), RFS ( p = 0.586), and DSS ( p = 0.912). The ESD group showed less blood loss, shorter procedure duration and hospital stay, lower hospital cost, and fewer adverse events. However, a lower R0 resection rate was observed in the ESD group compared to the esophagectomy group. Subgroup analysis showed comparable survival outcomes between the two groups. In Cox regression analysis, age was the independent factor associated with OS. Conclusion: In the treatment of SESCC, ESD showed sufficient safety and advantages. Even for pT1a-MM/pT1b SESCC, ESD may be an alternative treatment to esophagectomy.