Clinical advantage of endoscopic submucosal dissection over endoscopic mucosal resection for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers

T. Iizuka, D. Kikuchi, S. Hoteya, M. Nakamura, S. Yamashita, T. Mitani, H. Takeda, Naohisa Yahagi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and study aims: In previous series, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been used for the treatment of early-stage mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers to preserve patients quality of life. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offers potential advantages in comparison to EMR. So the aim of this retrospective study was to assess the utility of ESD compared with EMR for early-stage cancers of the meso- and hypopharynx. Patients and methods: We studied 56patients with 69lesions who underwent either EMR or ESD between April 2001 and December 2008.EMR was performed until January 2007, and ESD was performed from February 2007 onward. We evaluated the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and treatment-related complications as short-term outcomes. Local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, and disease-related deaths were compared to evaluate long-term outcomes. Results: The en bloc and R0 resection rates were respectively 98% and 79% in the ESD group and 37% and 26% in the EMR group.There were no cases of treatment-related complications in the EMR group, but postoperative subcutaneous emphysema was observed in two patients in the ESD group.In the EMR group, one patient developed a local recurrence and one developed metastasis to the cervical lymph node and died of primary cancer. Conclusions: ESD is a useful method of treatment for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers and may be superior to EMR.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)839-843
Number of pages5
JournalEndoscopy
Volume43
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Hypopharyngeal Neoplasms
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
Lymph Nodes
Neoplasm Metastasis
Subcutaneous Emphysema
Recurrence
Hypopharynx

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Clinical advantage of endoscopic submucosal dissection over endoscopic mucosal resection for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers. / Iizuka, T.; Kikuchi, D.; Hoteya, S.; Nakamura, M.; Yamashita, S.; Mitani, T.; Takeda, H.; Yahagi, Naohisa.

In: Endoscopy, Vol. 43, No. 10, 2011, p. 839-843.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Iizuka, T. ; Kikuchi, D. ; Hoteya, S. ; Nakamura, M. ; Yamashita, S. ; Mitani, T. ; Takeda, H. ; Yahagi, Naohisa. / Clinical advantage of endoscopic submucosal dissection over endoscopic mucosal resection for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers. In: Endoscopy. 2011 ; Vol. 43, No. 10. pp. 839-843.
@article{4a08e14eebc54f4ea4026f2119c8b6c6,
title = "Clinical advantage of endoscopic submucosal dissection over endoscopic mucosal resection for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers",
abstract = "Background and study aims: In previous series, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been used for the treatment of early-stage mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers to preserve patients quality of life. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offers potential advantages in comparison to EMR. So the aim of this retrospective study was to assess the utility of ESD compared with EMR for early-stage cancers of the meso- and hypopharynx. Patients and methods: We studied 56patients with 69lesions who underwent either EMR or ESD between April 2001 and December 2008.EMR was performed until January 2007, and ESD was performed from February 2007 onward. We evaluated the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and treatment-related complications as short-term outcomes. Local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, and disease-related deaths were compared to evaluate long-term outcomes. Results: The en bloc and R0 resection rates were respectively 98{\%} and 79{\%} in the ESD group and 37{\%} and 26{\%} in the EMR group.There were no cases of treatment-related complications in the EMR group, but postoperative subcutaneous emphysema was observed in two patients in the ESD group.In the EMR group, one patient developed a local recurrence and one developed metastasis to the cervical lymph node and died of primary cancer. Conclusions: ESD is a useful method of treatment for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers and may be superior to EMR.",
author = "T. Iizuka and D. Kikuchi and S. Hoteya and M. Nakamura and S. Yamashita and T. Mitani and H. Takeda and Naohisa Yahagi",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1055/s-0031-1271112",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "839--843",
journal = "Endoscopy",
issn = "0013-726X",
publisher = "Georg Thieme Verlag",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical advantage of endoscopic submucosal dissection over endoscopic mucosal resection for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers

AU - Iizuka, T.

AU - Kikuchi, D.

AU - Hoteya, S.

AU - Nakamura, M.

AU - Yamashita, S.

AU - Mitani, T.

AU - Takeda, H.

AU - Yahagi, Naohisa

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Background and study aims: In previous series, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been used for the treatment of early-stage mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers to preserve patients quality of life. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offers potential advantages in comparison to EMR. So the aim of this retrospective study was to assess the utility of ESD compared with EMR for early-stage cancers of the meso- and hypopharynx. Patients and methods: We studied 56patients with 69lesions who underwent either EMR or ESD between April 2001 and December 2008.EMR was performed until January 2007, and ESD was performed from February 2007 onward. We evaluated the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and treatment-related complications as short-term outcomes. Local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, and disease-related deaths were compared to evaluate long-term outcomes. Results: The en bloc and R0 resection rates were respectively 98% and 79% in the ESD group and 37% and 26% in the EMR group.There were no cases of treatment-related complications in the EMR group, but postoperative subcutaneous emphysema was observed in two patients in the ESD group.In the EMR group, one patient developed a local recurrence and one developed metastasis to the cervical lymph node and died of primary cancer. Conclusions: ESD is a useful method of treatment for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers and may be superior to EMR.

AB - Background and study aims: In previous series, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been used for the treatment of early-stage mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers to preserve patients quality of life. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offers potential advantages in comparison to EMR. So the aim of this retrospective study was to assess the utility of ESD compared with EMR for early-stage cancers of the meso- and hypopharynx. Patients and methods: We studied 56patients with 69lesions who underwent either EMR or ESD between April 2001 and December 2008.EMR was performed until January 2007, and ESD was performed from February 2007 onward. We evaluated the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and treatment-related complications as short-term outcomes. Local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, and disease-related deaths were compared to evaluate long-term outcomes. Results: The en bloc and R0 resection rates were respectively 98% and 79% in the ESD group and 37% and 26% in the EMR group.There were no cases of treatment-related complications in the EMR group, but postoperative subcutaneous emphysema was observed in two patients in the ESD group.In the EMR group, one patient developed a local recurrence and one developed metastasis to the cervical lymph node and died of primary cancer. Conclusions: ESD is a useful method of treatment for early mesopharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers and may be superior to EMR.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053945302&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053945302&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1055/s-0031-1271112

DO - 10.1055/s-0031-1271112

M3 - Article

C2 - 21833903

AN - SCOPUS:80053945302

VL - 43

SP - 839

EP - 843

JO - Endoscopy

JF - Endoscopy

SN - 0013-726X

IS - 10

ER -