1/1
4 files

Supplementary Material for: Features of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in Magnifying Narrow-Band Imaging

dataset
posted on 12.10.2020, 12:42 by Iwagami H., Kanesaka T., Ishihara R., Ohmori M., Matsuno K., Matsuura N., Nakahira H., Shichijo S., Maekawa A., Yamamoto S., Takeuchi Y., Higashino K., Uedo N., Nakatsuka S.
Background: Several endoscopic classifications for esophageal adenocarcinoma have been proposed; however, gastric adenocarcinoma is much more common than esophageal or esophagogastric junctional (EGJ) adenocarcinoma in East Asian countries. We, therefore, investigated whether an endoscopic diagnostic algorithm for gastric adenocarcinoma could be used for esophageal or EGJ adenocarcinoma. Methods: One hundred eighteen consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic resection or surgery for intramucosal esophageal or EGJ adenocarcinoma, at the Osaka International Cancer Institute between January 2006 and December 2017, were included in this retrospective study. Their lesions were classified as Siewert type 1 or 2, and the presence of endoscopic magnifying narrow-band imaging findings for diagnosing gastric adenocarcinoma was evaluated. Results: We evaluated 125 adenocarcinomas in 118 patients (29 type 1 and 96 type 2). Demarcation lines (DLs) were seen in 7 (24%) type 1 and 53 (55%) type 2 lesions. Irregular mucosal patterns were present in 2 (7%) type 1 and 22 (23%) type 2 lesions. Irregular vascular patterns were present in 26 (90%) type 1 and 50 (52%) type 2 lesions. According to the magnifying endoscopy diagnostic algorithm for gastric adenocarcinoma, only 7 (24%) type 1 and 52 (54%) type 2 lesions were correctly diagnosed as cancers (p = 0.005). Conclusion: The magnifying endoscopy diagnostic algorithm for gastric cancer may not be useful for esophageal or EGJ adenocarcinomas because of the low visibility of DLs, especially in Siewert type 1 adenocarcinoma.

History

Usage metrics

Categories

Licence

Exports