Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 32, Issue 5, pp 2274–2280 | Cite as

Non-exposure simple suturing endoscopic full-thickness resection (NESS-EFTR) versus laparoscopic wedge resection: a randomized controlled trial in a porcine model

  • Hong Man Yoon
  • Chan Gyoo Kim
  • Jong Yeul Lee
  • Soo-Jeong Cho
  • Myeong-Cherl Kook
  • Bang Wool Eom
  • Keun Won Ryu
  • Young-Woo Kim
  • Il Ju Choi
Article

Abstract

Background

Current endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) methods produce transmural communication and expose the tumor to the peritoneum. An EFTR method with a simple suturing technique that does not expose the gastric mucosa to the peritoneum (non-exposure simple suturing, NESS) was recently developed. To date, there have been no prospective studies that compare EFTR with laparoscopic wedge resection in human or animal. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between NESS-EFTR and laparoscopic wedge resection (LWR) using the linear staplers in a randomized animal study.

Methods

NESS-EFTR includes steps of laparoscopic seromuscular suturing, EFTR of the inverted stomach wall, and endoscopic mucosal suturing with endoloops and clips. Sixteen pigs underwent NESS-EFTR (n = 8) or LWR (n = 8). The resected locations were the cardia, fundus, upper body anterior and greater curvature, antrum lesser and greater curvature side. The pigs were killed 3 weeks after surgery. Rates of successful complete resection (en-bloc resection with clear margins), successful closure, and complications were evaluated.

Results

The complete resection rates in the NESS-EFTR and LWR groups were 100 and 75%, respectively (P = 0.467). All wounds were successfully closed in both groups. Resected tissues were significantly larger in the LWR group (mean ± SD: 8.0 ± 0.8 cm vs. 4.4 ± 0.5 cm, P < 0.001). Procedure time was significantly shorter in the LWR group (31.7 ± 10.0 min vs. 118.1 ± 23.4 min, P < 0.001). Early deaths due to complications only occurred in the LWR group (a leakage at cardia and a stenosis at the antrum lesser curvature side).

Conclusions

Incomplete resection and complications were occurred in only LWR group. NESS-EFTR was feasible and safe in animal.

Keywords

Endoscopic full-thickness resection Minimal invasive surgery Laparoscopic wedge resection Non-exposure technique 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Grant 1410190 and 1710280 from the National Cancer Center, Korea. The authors thank Dr. Junsun Ryu (Center for Thyroid Cancer, National Cancer Center, Korea) for his beautiful illustration, shown as Fig. 1.

Funding

This work was supported by Grant 1410190 and 1710280 from the National Cancer Center, Korea.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

Dr. Hong Man Yoon, Chan Gyoo Kim, Jong Yeul Lee, Soo-Jeong Cho, Myeong-Cherl Kook, Bang Wool Eom, Keun Won Ryu, Young-Woo Kim, and Il Ju Choi have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Lee JH, Kim JG, Jung HK, Kim JH, Jeong WK, Jeon TJ, Kim JM, Kim YI, Ryu KW, Kong SH, Kim HI, Jung HY, Kim YS, Zang DY, Cho JY, Park JO, Lim DH, Jung ES, Ahn HS, Kim HJ (2014) Clinical practice guidelines for gastric cancer in Korea: an evidence-based approach. J Gastric Cancer 14:87–104CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2017) Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer 20(1):1–9. doi: 10.1007/s10120-016-0622-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hanazaki K, Wakabayashi M, Sodeyama H, Miyazawa M, Yokoyama S, Sode Y, Kawamura N, Miyazaki T, Ohtsuka M (1997) Clinicopathologic features of submucosal carcinoma of the stomach. J Clin Gastroenterol 24:150–155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Information Committee of Korean Gastric Cancer Association (2016) Korean Gastric Cancer Association Nationwide Survey on Gastric Cancer in 2014. J Gastric Cancer 16:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ryu KW (2012) The future of sentinel node oriented tailored approach in patients with early gastric cancer. J Gastric Cancer 12:1–2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kitagawa Y, Takeuchi H, Takagi Y, Natsugoe S, Terashima M, Murakami N, Fujimura T, Tsujimoto H, Hayashi H, Yoshimizu N, Takagane A, Mohri Y, Nabeshima K, Uenosono Y, Kinami S, Sakamoto J, Morita S, Aikou T, Miwa K, Kitajima M (2013) Sentinel node mapping for gastric cancer: a prospective multicenter trial in Japan. J Clin Oncol 31:3704–3710CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bok GH, Kim YJ, Jin SY, Chun CG, Lee TH, Kim HG, Jeon SR, Cho JY (2012) Endoscopic submucosal dissection with sentinel node navigation surgery for early gastric cancer. Endoscopy 44:953–956CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ohgami M, Otani Y, Kumai K, Kubota T, Kim YI, Kitajima M (1999) Curative laparoscopic surgery for early gastric cancer: five years experience. World J Surg 23:187–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim CG (2013) Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and upper gastrointestinal tract. J Gastric Cancer 13:199–206CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hiki N, Yamamoto Y, Fukunaga T, Yamaguchi T, Nunobe S, Tokunaga M, Miki A, Ohyama S, Seto Y (2008) Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastrointestinal stromal tumor dissection. Surg Endosc 22:1729–1735CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Matsuda T, Hiki N, Nunobe S, Aikou S, Hirasawa T, Yamamoto Y, Kumagai K, Ohashi M, Sano T, Yamaguchi T (2016) Feasibility of laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastric submucosal tumors (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 84:47–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim CG, Yoon HM, Lee JY, Cho SJ, Kook MC, Eom BW, Ryu KW, Kim YW, Choi IJ (2015) Nonexposure endolaparoscopic full-thickness resection with simple suturing technique. Endoscopy 47:1171–1174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martinek J, Ryska O, Tuckova I, Filipkova T, Dolezel R, Juhas S, Motlik J, Zavoral M, Ryska M (2013) Comparing over-the-scope clip versus endoloop and clips (KING closure) for access site closure: a randomized experimental study. Surg Endosc 27:1203–1210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Woo JW, Ryu KW, Park JY, Eom BW, Kim MJ, Yoon HM, Park SR, Kook MC, Choi IJ, Kim YW, Park YI (2014) Prognostic impact of microscopic tumor involved resection margin in advanced gastric cancer patients after gastric resection. World J Surg 38:439–446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tsujimoto H, Yaguchi Y, Kumano I, Takahata R, Ono S, Hase K (2012) Successful gastric submucosal tumor resection using laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery. World J Surg 36:327–330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Milone M, Di Minno MN, Galloro G, Maietta P, Bianco P, Milone F, Musella M (2013) Safety and efficacy of barbed suture for gastrointestinal suture: a prospective and randomized study on obese patients undergoing gastric bypass. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:756–759CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mitsui T, Niimi K, Yamashita H, Goto O, Aikou S, Hatao F, Wada I, Shimizu N, Fujishiro M, Koike K, Seto Y (2014) Non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery as a novel partial gastrectomy technique. Gastric Cancer 17:594–599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Gastric CancerNational Cancer CenterGoyangRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations