Gastric Cancer

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 164–171 | Cite as

Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric epithelial neoplasm in chronic kidney disease patients: propensity score-matched case–control analysis

  • Young Kwon Choi
  • Ji Yong AhnEmail author
  • Hee Kyong Na
  • Kee Wook Jung
  • Do Hoon Kim
  • Jeong Hoon Lee
  • Kee Don Choi
  • Ho June Song
  • Gin Hyug Lee
  • Hwoon-Yong Jung
Original Article



Little is known about the outcomes of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We compared the efficacy and safety of ESD between CKD and non-CKD patients.


From January 2005 to December 2014, 102 CKD patients underwent ESD for gastric neoplasms at a tertiary medical institution were reviewed retrospectively. A propensity score-matched control group (102 patients) was selected from non-CKD patients to compare clinical outcomes between CKD and non-CKD patients.


En bloc resection (96.1%) and curative resection (88.2%) rates in the CKD group did not significantly differ from those in the non-CKD group. Median procedure times (25.0 vs. 21.5 min, p = 0.734) and perforation risk (p = 0.480) were similar between groups. The CKD group showed a tendency towards more bleeding events (p = 0.052) and had a significantly longer hospital stay (p = 0.001). In a subgroup analysis, stage 3 CKD patients exhibited a bleeding risk comparable to that exhibited by non-CKD patients (HR 1.35; 95% CI 0.36–5.06; p = 0.654), whereas stage 4 (HR 5.79; 95% CI 1.52–22.0; p = 0.010) and stage 5 (HR 4.80; 95% CI 1.58–14.6; p = 0.006) patients showed higher bleeding risks than non-CKD patients. In a multivariate analysis, stage 4/5 CKD was a significant predictor for bleeding risk (HR 4.99; 95% CI 1.32–18.8; p = 0.018).


ESD for gastric epithelial neoplasms can be performed in stage 3 CKD patients with comparable efficacy and safety to that performed in non-CKD patients. Stage 4 and 5 CKD patients should be closely monitored for bleeding events after ESD.


Gastric neoplasms Endoscopic submucosal dissection Chronic kidney diseases 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no potential conflict of interest relevant to the present study.

Ethical statement

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions. The exemption from the informed consent requirement permitted by the Asan Medical Center Institutional Review Board.

Supplementary material

10120_2018_848_MOESM1_ESM.tif (651 kb)
Supplementary Figure 1. Distribution of calculated propensity score for overall enrolled patients. CKD: chronic kidney disease (TIF 651 KB)
10120_2018_848_MOESM2_ESM.docx (25 kb)
Supplementary Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the overall cohort (DOCX 24 KB)


  1. 1.
    Shin H-Y, Lee J-Y, Song J, Lee S, Lee J, Lim B, et al. Cause-of-death statistics in the Republic of Korea, 2014. J Korean Med Assoc. 2016;59(3):221 – 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS, Kim MC, Han SU, Kim W, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report–a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg. 2010;251(3):417 – 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Degiuli M, Sasako M, Ponti A, Vendrame A, Tomatis M, Mazza C, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing survival after D1 or D2 gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2014;101(2):23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ahn JY, Jung HY, Choi KD, Choi JY, Kim MY, Lee JH, et al. Endoscopic and oncologic outcomes after endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer: 1370 cases of absolute and extended indications. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74(3):485 – 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park YM, Cho E, Kang HY, Kim JM. The effectiveness and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(8):2666–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Numata N, Oka S, Tanaka S, Higashiyama M, Sanomura Y, Yoshida S, et al. Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in patients with chronic kidney disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;28(10):1632–7.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Matsumura T, Arai M, Maruoka D, Okimoto K, Minemura S, Ishigami H, et al. Risk factors for early and delayed post-operative bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric neoplasms, including patients with continued use of antithrombotic agents. BMC Gastroenterol. 2014;14(1):172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;39(2 Suppl 1):S1-266.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Levey AS, Bosch JP, Lewis J, et al. A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(6):461 – 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14(2):101 – 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017;20(1):1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lin DY, Wei LJ. The robust inference for the cox proportional hazards model. J Am Stat Assoc. 1989;84(408):1074–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newman LA, Mittman N, Hunt Z, Alfonso AE. Survival among chronic renal failure patients requiring major abdominal surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;188(3):310–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsumoto S, Takayama T, Wakatsuki K, Tanaka T, Migita K, Nakajima Y. Short-term and long-term outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer in patients with chronic kidney disease. World J Surg. 2014;38(6):1453–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Park CH, Lee H, Kim DW, Chung H, Park JC, Shin SK, et al. Clinical safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with surgery in elderly patients with early gastric cancer: a propensity-matched analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80(4):599–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goto O, Fujishiro M, Kodashima S, Ono S, Niimi K, Yamamichi N, et al. Feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for patients with chronic renal failure on hemodialysis. Dig Endosc. 2010;22(1):45 – 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yoshioka T, Nishida T, Tsujii M, Kato M, Hayashi Y, Komori M, et al. Renal dysfunction is an independent risk factor for bleeding after gastric ESD. Endosc Int Open. 2015;3(1):E39-45.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Isomoto H, Shikuwa S, Yamaguchi N, Fukuda E, Ikeda K, Nishiyama H, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a large-scale feasibility study. Gut. 2009;58(3):331–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim BJ, Chang TH, Kim JJ, Min BH, Lee JH, Son HJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in patients with comorbid diseases. Gut Liver. 2010;4(2):186 – 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Galbusera M, Remuzzi G, Boccardo P. Treatment of bleeding in dialysis patients. Semin Dial. 2009;22(3):279 – 86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Gastric Cancer Association and The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Young Kwon Choi
    • 1
  • Ji Yong Ahn
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hee Kyong Na
    • 1
  • Kee Wook Jung
    • 1
  • Do Hoon Kim
    • 1
  • Jeong Hoon Lee
    • 1
  • Kee Don Choi
    • 1
  • Ho June Song
    • 1
  • Gin Hyug Lee
    • 1
  • Hwoon-Yong Jung
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical CenterUniversity of Ulsan College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations